Hansard, 1964-11-05

2.31 p.m. Order read for resuming adjourned debate on Amendment [4th November, 1964] to Question [4th November, 1964]. "That, in view of the seriousness of the situation which will affect the lives and properties of the people of Singapore following the pursuance of the present policy of military expansion and war by the Alliance Government, and the measures taken by the Central Government to coerce youths of Singapore to undergo military training, this Assembly calls on the Singapore Government to urge the Central Government to stop conscripting such youths for military service.".-(Mr Kow Kee Seng). Which Amendment was, to leave out - "the pursuance of the present policy of military expansion and war by the Alliance Government, and the measures taken by the Central Government to coerce youths of Singapore to undergo military training, this Assembly calls on the Singapore Government to urge the Central Government to stop conscripting such youths for military service" and insert - "Indonesia's policy of aggression and subversion, this House calls upon the Central Government to take all measures to secure the safety of the lives and property of our citizens, and for this purpose to give our youth proper military training to help defend the sovereignty of our nation". - (The Deputy Prime Minister - Dr Toh Chin Chye). Question again proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out, be left out."

As agreed by the House, the debate on the motion and on the amendment will be proceeded with simultaneously. The Member for Jurong had the Floor just before the Assembly rose last night. Mr Chia Thye Poh. 2.33 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, we see that the present situation is serious enough. We also see that a lot of money earned by the sweat and blood of the people has been used to buy foreign arms,and to bring into this country foreign soldiers, rockets and other things to preserve Malaysia and to continue with the suppression of the people and their just struggle. Thus, under these circumstances, this territory will become an arena for Anglo-American imperialists and colonialists for their trial of strength. The purchasing of foreign armaments can only give wealth and benefit to foreign manufacturers of arms and can only bring misery and suffering to the people in this territory. Not only are the people faced with economic bankruptcy, they are also facing the calamity of disruption and breaking-up of their families. The North Bornean uprising is the struggle of the people to free themselves, but the British have been brought there to continue to suppress the people, thus expanding the war. After observing the situation in North Borneo, certain British military officers say that the war there will continue for quite a long time, perhaps eight or 10 years, maybe longer. It will be a protracted war. Even the British themselves are not sure of the duration of the war, and are not sure of the outcome of their armed suppression of the people there. So, resorting to arms and war cannot solve the problem at all. Not only that, it will bring more suffering and hardships to the people, will cause a squandering of Government funds, and will incur more and more hatred from the people. Under these circumstances, there are only two courses open to the political Parties. One is to solve the question of Malaysia politically. In other words, return to the people their basic rights; to disband Malaysia and to allow the people to decide for themselves their destiny. The other course is to continue with dictatorial and adventurous action and to gamble with the lives of our youths and to make cannon fodder of them. Now, the Alliance Government have chosen the second course. They would not like to rectify the error they have made. At the same time, they think that they can bamboozle the people by covering up their present embarrassment. They have put up slogans such as "Defend the Country" and the rest of it in order to divert the people's attention. We have now seen the psychological warfare and many other campaigns waged by the Government. This psychological warfare has been conducted in many fields, such as patriotic conferences, confrontation exhibitions, forums and the rest of it. But no matter how and in whatever way the Government carry out this campaign, the purpose of it all is to distort the truth and confuse the people by catch phrases and slogans in order to extend the war to preserve their consolidated interests. True patriots have been branded as pro-Indonesia and traitors. At a recent exhibition put up in Singapore, even Inche Boestaman was branded as a traitor to this territory. Boestaman was arrested because of his past struggle against the British colonialists. His arrest only proves the pro-colonial inclination of the Party in power. But we can also understand the hue and cry made by the Government. They will put out more catch slogans and phrases. They will continue with their present line of action and repeat cant phrases in order to maintain their own position. The real anti-national traitors in the Party in power will continue to resort to old tactics and intrigues. We have sufficient facts to see through them. China has also been accused by Chiang Kai-shek as a Soviet stooge. Other countries have been branded by these Rightists as Communist stooges. No matter how the Party in power wage psychological warfare, the people are still clear in their hearts. In Borneo there are about 2,000 youths who have escaped into Brunei. Why should they do so? Because they do not want to be conscripted into the army to fight other people's cause. The Chief Minister of Sarawak also said that about 20,000 youths in Sarawak had disappeared. They did not want to join national service. This is a most regrettable matter to him. Even in Malaya and Singapore there are also thousands of youths who do not want to be enlisted and become cannon fodder. According to the Government of Singapore, there are about 50,000 youths in Singapore who are eligible for national service. But, in fact, the actual figure given by them is 70,000. Many Singapore youths do not want to enlist. The Deputy Prime Minister said yesterday that the number was 50,000. So it was 20,000 less than the official figure of 70,000. What is the actual position? We do not know. Only the Party in power know the actual facts. From this difference in the figures quoted, we can know that the Government are playing with figures. No matter how they do it, the youths of Singapore still do not want to enlist as and become soldiers and cannon fodder. If the Party in power describe this unwillingness on the part of Singapore's youths as being anti-national and traitorous, then I say that there are thousands more of these youths in Singapore, including some members of the P.A.P. in the lower stratum, who refuse to listen to the cries of the P.A.P. leadership to join the national service. They do not want to take part in any military training in spite of intimidation and propaganda. So if they call us anti-national, then there are some members who are not only anti-national but also anti their own Party. This shows that the P.A.P. itself is not even in a position to bluff its own members, to say nothing of the people at large. The refusal of the people to take part in national service is gathering momentum. Appreciating this difficult situation and losing confidence in Malaysia itself, the Prime Minister keeps on saying that we should have confidence in Malaysia. His repeated statements about having confidence in Malaysia show that he himself lacks confidence. That is why he wants to use words to restore the confidence of the people in Malaysia. In fact, he went to London to get help to solve his present embarrassment. The opportunistic P.A.P. leadership has no guts to go against the unreasonable policies of the Alliance Government. So it has no alternative but to follow the policies of the Alliance, much against its will. We know that the present situation of the P.A.P. leadership is rather tragic and regrettable. Who knows that one day the Prime Minister of Singapore may be degraded to the position of Chief Steward of Singapore? If the leadership still continues to play with politics, then one day it will find itself in a very difficult situation. Mr Speaker, no matter how much the P.A.P. smear us, our loyalty to the people at large will be appreciated by the people themselves. Our determination to go against Malaysia and conscription is unshakable. We believe that only the people themselves can solve their own problems. They cannot be solved by British soldiers. The people of Singapore have already made their contribution by way of opposing Malaysia. Our leaders have gone to gaol because of their opposition to Malaysia. Internationally there are countries which are against Malaysia.

On a point of order. Under the amended Standing Orders, the Member is allowed a maximum of one hour to deliver his speech. Yesterday he had the Floor for at least 45 minutes. I think by now he has exceeded the time limit.

Order. I have got a brief on my table which says that the Member for Jurong was on his feet yesterday for 21 minutes.

(In Mandarin): If you say that Afro-Asian countries are for the struggle against Malaysia, then it shows that our stand against Malaysia is correct. If the ruling Party says that it is because we are against Malaysia that others also follow us, then it means that we are very strong to be able to influence others to accept our stand against Malaysia. In fact, there are some 50 countries in Afro-Asia which are against Malaysia. So the Party in power is less influential than we are. In spite of the tours of the Prime Minister to Africa and other countries, he has not been able to enlist support for Malaysia from the Afro-Asian nations. What we want to remind the Party in power is that we never expect any foreign power to replace our own power and strength against Malaysia. So long as Malaysia remains in existence and so long as military expansion is the policy of the Government, we shall continue to go against Malaysia and conscription. We shall not change our stand unless they change their policies. And the people will suffer as long as their policies are not changed. One day when the Prime Minister himself meets with difficulties, then he will realise and admit that our stand against Malaysia is correct and that our stand against conscription is proper and correct. Mr Speaker, that is all I wish to say. 2.52 p.m.

Mr Speaker, in speaking on the motion and the amendment to the motion, I wish to deal with the problem in a way which may be of interest to the business community in Singapore, particularly to the Chinese business community. The original motion as proposed by the Barisan Sosialis is intended to weaken the resolve of our citizens to stand up to the undeclared war waged by Indonesia against us, which is called confrontation. There has been an unending series of incursions across the Sabah and Sarawak borders by Indonesian armed forces. In recent months Indonesian commandos and paratroopers have landed on the Malaysian mainland itself. Here it is not a case of the Malaysian Government and we waging war against the Indonesians. Quite the reverse. Indonesian armed forces consider themselves entitled at will to invade our territory. In the face of this military threat, the Barisan Sosialis believe that the best solution is to disarm ourselves. No doubt the Barisan Sosialis will welcome the occupation of Singapore and other Malaysian territories by the Indonesian army. But I believe that the overwhelming majority of our citizens have not the slightest desire for the country to be occupied by the Indonesian army. Put it in these basic terms, it is obvious where the choice lies. But in the present political and economic situation in Singapore, there may be members of the business community, especially the Chinese business community, whose businesses have been hit by confrontation and who may try to get a quick and easy solution. They are asking themselves: is there a short-cut whereby we can make peace with Indonesia and resume our formerly prosperous business? Now, I have been privileged to be present at the two Ministerial discussions in Bangkok and at the summit conference in Tokyo. I can therefore speak with some authority derived from personal contact and negotiations with the Indonesian leaders. I am in a better position than most Members of this Assembly to assess their intentions and, on the basis of this assessment, to say what the prospects are of an early and easy settlement with Indonesia. I have to say that there is none whatsoever, and that we must be prepared to live with confrontation for a very long time. Of course, we can settle on Indonesian terms, which simply means that we will divest ourselves of the means to stand up to military pressure which they may apply on any occasion in the future. A condition of the demand that we disarm ourselves is the early and complete removal of the British military presence. Unless we are prepared to give a timetable for the withdrawal of British military forces from Malaysia, a timetable acceptable to the Indonesian political and army leaders, there can be no peaceful settlement of this conflict between us. That was the position as I found it at the first Bangkok meeting. That was also the position when the summit talks collapsed in Tokyo last June. So the question that the business community, especially the Chinese business community, must face is this: do they want an early solution which will bring about an inevitable occupation of our country by Indonesian troops? Or are they prepared to stand up and fight? If there is any other way whereby we can achieve a peaceful settlement without risking Indonesian military occupation, I can assure this Assembly that we will try our best to get it. But in the nature of things it is just not on the cards, and we are therefore faced with the prospect of a long struggle. And here it is important that the Chinese business community make their calculations correctly. They would be extremely foolish to fall for the bait of early resumption of business when that bait contains the seeds of their own destruction. The Chinese business community in Indonesia, some 15 or more years ago, made a fatal and tragic error and they are now paying very dearly for it. Historians who have studied the fortunes of the Indonesian Communist Party were amazed at the support which a substantial part of the Chinese business community in Java extended to the P.K.I. in its early formative stage in the post-war years when the P.K.I. was operating for the first time in its history as a legal political organisation. Why the Chinese business community acted in this manner is still a mystery. Perhaps they were resentful over some nagging petty regulations or restrictions which the national Government imposed on them and, therefore, they decided to lend support to some opposition Party. Perhaps they thought that by giving money to the P.K.I., they could have a measure of control over their policy. Whatever the reasons were, the course of events took a turn completely different from what they themselves had expected or hoped for. When the Indonesian economy deteriorated with increasing rapidity, the influence of the moderate Indonesian leadership declined, as I shall explain later. In their place hot-heads and ultra-nationalists emerged. When this happened, naturally a scapegoat must be found for the economic morass into which the country had floundered. The scapegoat then was the Chinese population in general and Chinese businessmen in particular. In large parts of Java, Chinese shops were closed down and the Chinese population physically driven out at the point of the bayonet. In many other places, their property was confiscated. And even when they were allowed to do business, it was on very restrictive and often humiliating terms. These facts are well known to our Chinese business community especially those who have business ties with the Chinese in Indonesia. Needless to say, if we are to be completely defenceless, as the Barisan Sosialis want us to be, then the occupation of our country by Indonesian troops will automatically take place and our Chinese businessmen cannot expect a treatment better than that which their compatriots received in Indonesia. In the early days of the P.K.I., on several occasions they came close to political extinction, principally because of pursuing anti-national political activities. But on each occasion the Chinese businessmen financed and even supported them organisationally so as to enable them to make a quick re covery. Mr Speaker, if you think it incredible that Chinese businessmen in Indonesia could support a Communist movement in that country, let me remind you of a certain elderly Chinese gentleman in Singapore who was openly in cahoots with our Communist comrades here. When he found to his chagrin that this got him nowhere, he did a startling somersault and he is now hobnobbing with certain interesting people on the ultra Right. To return to the situation in Indonesia. Before the assumption of total power by President Soekarno in 1958, we saw a series of Indonesian Governments headed by people such as Dr Hatta, Mr Soetan Sjahrir, Dr Djuanda and others. These are the ablest and most rational leaders which Indonesia has produced, and they bent all their energies to reviving the economy of Indonesia in order to raise the livelihood of the masses and the peasantry, to make business run more efficiently, to increase production in the estates and in the tin mines, the oilfields, and indeed in all sectors of the economy. They resolutely opposed political adventures such as the West Irian campaign. They concentrated all their energies on economic reconstruction. Unfortunately for them, their efforts came to nought. The principal reason for this is that the Communist Party of Indonesia, through its affiliated trade unions and peasant or ganisations, were able to frustrate each and every attempt at economic improvement. Strikes paralysed the ports, factories, estates, oilfields and other economic enterprises as and when the Communist leaders called for them. So when the rational economic solution attempted by Hatta, Soetan Sjahrir and others failed, the only course of action open to the Indonesian leaders was to play the line of hysterical ultra nationalism. In parti cular the leaders had to create external enemies whose imagined threat to the Indonesian revolution provided a rallying point. In this way they forestalled the time when the Republic of Indonesia would disintegrate. First, there was the West Irian campaign. When this was wound up successfully - and we in Malaysia, Mr Speaker, Sir, helped them in this venture - then a fresh external enemy had to be discovered. Unfortunately for us, this time the enemy they chose is us. The present Indonesian Gov ernment cannot make honourable peace with Malaysia because then President Soekarno and other Indonesian leaders would have to explain to the people why they are so desperately poor, and he would have no external adventure to divert his people's attention from their present abject poverty. So these are the basic revolutionary forces that are propelling the Indonesian leaders in the present situation. Even if President Soekarno were to die, or if he were to be deposed today, I do not believe that the new setup that will emerge will be one with which we can come to terms on an honourable basis. There are some businessmen who wonder whether or not Singapore would not have been better off if she had not joined Malaysia. Businessmen who so believe this are calculating on the basis that in an independent Singapore the British military forces will remain for an indefinite period so as to prevent any possible take-over of the Government by the pro-Communist open-front organisations in the first place, and the Malayan Communist Party soon after that. Now this assumption of theirs about an independent Singapore is completely false. In the present world situation, with the emergence into independence of nearly the whole area of Asia and Africa, it would not be possible for the British to maintain their military establishments in Singapore if the elected independent Government of Singapore asked them to leave. This has happened in Ceylon, where the British once maintained a naval base in Trincomalee. So the alternative scheme to Singapore's entry into Malaysia which flight have avoided Indonesian economic confrontation depended for its survival and economic prosperity on the completely false assumption that British military power can remain to prevent the Communist take-over. But they cannot remain. What will happen if the Communists take over the government in Singapore, whether by fair means or foul? There will be a conflict between a Singapore and a Malayan Government. Such a conflict may start, first, by an economic blockade of the island with consequences more disastrous than Indonesian economic confrontation. This conflict will eventually escalate into war between the two territories. And let us not delude ourselves into believing that that cannot happen here. It has happened in other countries. Think of Korea, Vietnam, Laos, and Cyprus. And it could, and in my calculation probably would, take place if Singapore had gone it alone. So we had no alternative but to press ahead with Malaysia. The troubles that we are facing are not of our own making, but are clearly the result of the decision of the Indonesian Government to interfere in our domestic affairs with the object of absorbing us. In this situation, we have one of two choices. First, to surrender, if not immediately, then through a so-called negotiated peace which would leave us defenceless against military occupation any time President Soekarno decides to carry it out. The second choice is to stand up and fight. It is only traitors in this country like the antinational, pro-Communist, pro-Indonesia, bankrupt political forces in the Barisan Sosialis which favour surrender to Indonesia. The Barisan Sosialis leaders, of course, hope that if they were to assist Indonesia in successfully subverting the country, they would be rewarded with high office under Indonesian military occupation, positions which they were unable to win in democratic elections. Mr Speaker, Sir, let me stress the gravity of the issue we are debating. We are not here like little children playing marbles in the backyard, or building sand-castles on the beaches; nor are we debating stand-pipes, schools or community centres. The issue before us is one of survival, of life and death, of resisting enslavement by a larger country with reckless leaders and a big army. The levers and instruments here are not nice speeches or delicate diplomatic manoeuvres, nor even more unpleasantly petty political intrigues and conspiracies. The levers here are those of naked power, power which, as a great revolutionary puts it, comes out of the barrel of the gun. Whether we like it or not, we live in a revolutionary epoch and right in the heart of the seething revolutionary arena of South-East Asia. It may be a good thing for me to remind hon. Members of what that same great revolutionary said of revolutions. He said, "A revolution is not an invitation to a banquet. It is not essay writing, embroidery, poetry or other nice and elegant things. It is the effective and organised use of violence."

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, the speeches made by comedians like Charlie Chaplin in films and T.V, do not surprise us at all. But if such speeches come from the mouth of politicians who are Members of this House and if they are designed to weaken the spirit and determination of the people, then they must be deprecated. We are shocked to see the motion moved by the Barisan Sosialis, because at a time when Malaysia is facing con frontation from the enemy followed by incursions and aggression from the air, sea and on land, the Members of the Barisan Sosialis who claim themselves to be genuine patriots and who are lauded by their foreign masters are prepared to move a motion of a nature which will bring disgrace and dishonour to our nation. If hon. Members of the Barisan Sosialis will read between the lines of their motion and feel that there is no truth in it, they can withdraw it. We do not indulge in lies as the Barisan Sosialis are fond of doing in this House.

Order. No Member of this House can be called a liar. Will the Member please withdraw the statement that the Barisan Sosialis Members in this House tell lies?

(In Malay): Mr Speaker. I am prepared to abide by your ruling. But the Member for Paya Lebar accused me of being a liar. Maybe. Mr Speaker, you did not hear the translation. Therefore, I had to rebut his accusation.

I did not hear it. But if my attention had been drawn to it, I would have certainly done something about it. Please continue, Inche Yaacob.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, I withdraw the statement I made just now. If we read carefully the motion in the names of the Member for Jurong and the Member for Paya Lebar, we can arrive at this conclusion, that it is a continuous link-up with those who call themselves "fighters of the national Kalimantan Utara" led by Sheik Azahan and with the Voice from Jakarta. The object of this motion is purely to weaken the spirit of our people in order that our people, who have been known for their fighting qualities, can become cowards. Should this be the attitude of warriors of a nation which the Barisan Sosialis claim to be proud of? Mr Speaker, Sir, there is a saying, "Do not beat a hornless bull because if you do so and he cannot attack you with his horns, he will find other means of attacking you." Similarly if our small Malaysia which loves peace is provoked by aggression, we are prepared to lay down our lives in its defence. How shall we show our integrity and honour in the face of this crisis at a time when our country is being attacked? We read from the newspapers that our youths are rallying to the call to defend their country. Thousands of them have come forward to register for military service and they have patriotically pledged to defend their country. They would rather be dead than just merely he alive. This is the pledge of true Malaysian patriots who love their fatherland. Even women have stated publicly in the newspapers that they want the Government to arm them for military service. They have called upon the youths of this country to defend our integrity and sovereignty. If any youth is not prepared to defend the country, then he should strip himself naked. The object of this motion is to weaken the determination of our youths. If our youths are not prepared to defend the country and they do not consider themselves to be warriors of the fatherland, then we cannot say that they belong either to the male or female sex. Mr Speaker, Sir, it is now clear that those who call themselves patriots and who are lauded by the so-called freedom fighters abroad are, in fact, the agents, henchmen and puppets of the new neocolonialism. Their argument is that Malaysia was forced upon the people of Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak. This is nothing new. The concept of Malaysia has been mooted long ago. We held a referendum to determine this issue. Malaysia was established before the general elections were held in Singapore and Malaysia. In the general elections after Malaysia, the Parties against Malaysia were rejected by the people, if Malaysia was rejected by the people, then naturally the Parties who were against Malaysia would be in power today. But we know that the pro-Malaysia Parties received a clear mandate from the people. Was Malaysia then forced upon the people? I am surprised to see Members of the Barisan Sosialis with droopy eyes in the day. Mr Speaker, Sir, we heard Opposition Members use the word "war", which, of course, has been brought about by the neo-colonialist power. Malaysia has never embarked upon any aggression. Even the Philippines which is claiming Sabah has not made any incursions into Malaysian soil. It is not Malaysia which is the aggressor. It is Malaysia that has been attacked by the Indonesians and a few traitors, as witnessed the landings in Labis and Malacca. If it is true that confrontation by our enemy is to protect or safeguard Malaysia, as alleged by the Member for Paya Lebar, I am very surprised why Indonesia is still reluctant to free Timor Island - an island which is not far from Indonesia - which is still being colonised by Portugal, and why the right of self-determination has not been implemented in West Irian. Why is this so if Indonesia is struggling for the right of self-determination of other countries? Why did Indonesia not say a word before Malaya achieved independence and before Singapore merged with Malaya at a time when Indonesia had friendly relations with Malaya? When Malaya realised its independence in 1957, surely Indonesia realised that British forces were still stationed in Malaya. Why was there no confrontation then? Why do they now claim that they want to liberate Malaysia from neo-colonialism? Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to refer to something which took place 12 years ago. An Indonesian, Professor Mohamed Yamin, who was then the Minister for Education and Culture, was interviewed by an American journalist who asked him, "Is Indonesia claiming West Irian from the point of view of history?" Professor Yamin answered, "No, we do not claim West Irian from the historical point of view. But we are claiming it from the point of view of Dutch colonialism. This includes Kalimantan Utara, Malaya and others." This was the basic intention of the Indonesian people. They wanted to absorb Malaya into Indonesia. This has been the basic struggle of the Indonesian leaders since 1945. They wanted to establish an independent Malaya within the framework of Indonesia Raya which was subsequently changed to Melayu Raya. This is nothing new to old freedom-fighters because this happened only some 11 or 12 years ago. It is only the newcomers who do not know about this struggle. The Member for Paya Lebar drew attention to the fact that his Secretary-General, Mr Lim Chin Siong, did give advice with a warning but that we did not heed it. His advice was that if Singapore were to join Malaya, the consequences would be grave. So the analysis of his Secretary-General has come true. The Barisan want the prediction of their Secretary-General to materialise, because in an interview with a journalist of Bintang Timor he said that it was better for Singapore to merge with Indonesia than Malaya. Mr Speaker, it is now clear who are the patriots of Malaysia. Unfortunately, the Member for Jalan Kayu is not with us now. Yesterday he said that conscription was not only against the wishes of the people, but it was forcing our youths here to fight against their brothers in Borneo or Kalimantan Utara. Mr Speaker, what is the definition of "our brothers in Kalimantan Utara"? We are not fighting our fellow countrymen in Sabah. We are fighting the aggressors from Indonesia. Are the enemies we are trying to drive out our brothers? Brothers, not to us, but to members of the Barisan Sosialis. This is as clear as daylight. I am sometimes confused because of the constant con tradiction in their arguments. I do not recognise the aggressors as our brothers. Our brothers are the patriots who are prepared to fight for every inch of our country, and not the soldiers who have landed on our soil. The term "brothers" is used by pro-Communist and Communist supporters. Then the Member for Jalan Kayu went on to say that although Malaysia is independent, it is not a sovereign State. They say that there are foreign bases in Malaysia. Malaysia was not invited to the Cairo Conference, therefore it is not a sovereign State. I am puzzled by the definition of the term "sovereignty". Does he mean to say that only in Malaysia there are foreign bases? What about in Africa and other parts of Asia? As I have said earlier on, I am confused. Because we were not invited to attend the Cairo Conference, we are not an independent country? A country which has been acknowledged by the United Nations as being independent and sovereign. It is not independent according to the definition of Communist and pro-Communist elements. The Member for Thomson yesterday said. "The people are against conscription. We have canvassed from house to house to find out the views of the people, and our finding is that they are against conscription." It is still fresh in my memory. Mr Speaker, when a Gallup poll was held by University graduates at Tanjong Pagar. They issued a statement in Tanjong Pagar showing the percentage of the electorate in Tanjong Pagar who were agreed on merger in accordance with the White Paper or merger in accordance with conditions for Sabah and Sarawak. They claimed that 80 per cent were against the White Paper merger. That was the result of their Gallup poll. They were the judges and they were the election officers. They counted the ballot papers and they were the returning officers. They claimed that 80 per cent were against the White Paper merger. Now they come hack again to the House to claim that they are the real and only representatives of the people. Mr Speaker. I do not wish to labour at length on this point. It is a shame when our country is facing a crisis, attacked by the enemy from the air, on land and at sea to urge the Central Government to stop conscription and exhort the youth not to take up military service. It is a sin perpetrated by Members of the Barisan Sosialis. Posterity will never forgive them. This mistake is due to the fact that there are cowards agitated by the Barisan Sosialis in this House. Mr Speaker, I support wholeheartedly the amendment moved by the Deputy Prime Minister. The moment has arrived when we should rise and respond to the call. There is a Malay saying - when the house is burning, the rats run. It is a shame to our nation. I urge and appeal to all people who love peace, who love their fatherland, to rise and respond to the call. It is better to die fighting than merely to live. 3.39 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, there is an air of complete unreality in the debate that has taken place on this motion by the Barisan Sosialis to condemn national service, the training of our youths in military combat and the remote possibility of their dying in the jungles of Sabah and Sarawak. Nobody really believes, not even the Barisan Sosialis, that there is any immediate probability or likelihood of the youths of Singapore being called out in significant numbers to fight or die for Malaysia. A lot of news was created out of national registration and national service. About March this year it was introduced in the peninsula. Later it was extended to Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak in order that we shall all be equal Malaysians. Out of this prodigious patriotic effort, only some 80 young men from Singapore have gone to Port Dickson for some military training. But this Barisan motion and the Government's amendment to it are matters of postures, and they are important. For it is in our postures that we give an indication of whether we are growing up to the realities of life in South-East Asia or whether we are still adolescents in a world of make-believe, of sheriffs and bandits, of revolutionary anti-colonialists and wicked white colonial exploiters. Unfortunately, Mr Speaker, Sir, the world and South-East Asia cannot be painted in such simple black and white. For the Barisan Sosialis, listening to them yesterday, the world has stood still since 1961. Malaysia is still a neo-colonialist plot, a big sellout. There is still the myth of revolutionary uprisings in Sabah and Sarawak being crushed by a colonial power grasping its £400 million worth of investments, according to the Member for Jurong, without quoting his authority. Does he really sincerely believe all that he said, all the Member for Paya Lebar has said now? For them nothing has changed. It is a remarkable capacity for self-deception. Still the well-established, anti-colonial, anti-Malaysia, anti-national service line. The same old arguments, all trotted out from their 1961 archives. The anti-national service one, it goes back one decade to 1954. Still against the wicked colonialists who are going to make our poor Chinese middle school students die for a wicked imperialist cause, cannon fodder. And they dutifully repeat this line of suppression of the people's liberation movement. The only indication that came from the Opposition benches that these speeches were being made in November 1964 and not 1962 or 1961 was from the Member for Hong Lim. He has a keen sense of what the Communists call "tailism". The tail and "ism". The mass sets the pace. In order not to be left behind, you tail in. He correctly reflected the different mood and temper of the people when he said, "Military service, yes." Well, the Member for Hong Lim was caught in a dilemma. He added this proviso, "But our youths are not to fight and die outside Singapore. We can defend ourselves by just squatting on this island of 214 square miles." One can sympathise with the Member for Hong Lim. He can no longer afford to follow in the wake of the Barisan - hoping that when heads are chopped off, the body will go with him. But that has not happened. The Barisan is still there, still growing more stupid heads. And he knows that the Barisan is isolated. It is chilly when you are isolated, when you mount a demonstration in Hong Lim Green and the masses have vanished into thin air. The poor Member for Choa Chu Kang is now cooling his heels off for six months to contemplate the folly of his actions and wondering how it was that some of his compatriots now in this Chamber were braver and fiercer revolutionaries but wiser men and still here. So the Member for Hong Lim cannot agree with them because he knows the masses are melting away. He cannot agree with the P.A.P, either because his propaganda line is that whatever the P.A.P, does is bad. Therefore, when we say that the people should be trained - and he knows that the people generally want to get trained - he says, "Yes, agree to one-half and disagree with the other half," and be absent from the vote so that his position is still re served. Who knows now that perhaps other heads and other movements may disappear, and he will inherit. But the Barisan's old refrain sounds oddly out of tune in these very awkward circumstances. The Member for Jurong said yesterday that the situation is getting graver day by day. I saw some very gray and tired lines on his face. The youthful cherubic appearance of the assistant professor has given way to the first lines of real rugged granite bitterness of the stark realities of a revolution that has failed. He reminded the House, and regardless of Central Government propaganda, that it was not the Indonesians alone but local fierce freedom fighters leading the way into Pontian and Labis. He commiserated a lot of the poor people who suffered as a consequence of this ever graver situation - fishermen cannot fish, and curfews. His heart bled for the masses. On whose side is he on? Always on the side of the masses, that goes without saying. But I want to know in this particular case when here is a group of people who land by parachutes and by motor boats on territory which is not theirs, and this has made it necessary for the elected Government of Malaysia to impose these restrictions in order to prevent these incursions, on whose side is he on? Is he saying that all these hardships can be avoided just by not having curfews, not defending ourselves, having more chaps leading more Indonesians in? Is that what he is saying? it will end up with no Malaysia; of course, I agree with him. You get more locals leading more Indonesians, no defence taken, and as he says, there will be no Malaysia. And then what? The revolution has failed. Sir, the Member has a remarkable capacity for sticking to the established line. Confrontation came because Malaysia is a neo-colonialist plan, and it therefore brought in troubles and tribulations. Why is it a neo-colonialist plan? Because 80,000 square miles of real estate in Sabah and Sarawak were forcibly added to form Malaysia in order to preserve £400 million worth of investment. So my colleague the Minister for Finance wanted to know whether these investments in Sabah and Sarawak are in danger of being robbed or whether, in fact, they were already in Malaya and there was almost no significant investment in Sabah and Sarawak. What was it about? He could not answer. Then, all in the same breath, he went on to say that the intention of the British as colonialists must be to extend the war in Asia. E was flabbergasted, because if you extend the war - I mean, the classic theory of imperialism is that you must have war because of a conflict of interests, and when wars take place the wicked capitalists sell guns to both sides to fight each other. Then it makes sense to me. Malaysia fights Indonesia. Malaysia buys helicopters, guns, submarines, jets, etc, from the British. So the British have an interest in extending the war. The Americans and the Russians sell guns to Indonesia, and the British, Australians and New Zealanders sell guns to us. But is he seriously suggesting that we should believe him when he said that the British extend the war in Asia all in order that more British money will be lost in hiring Gurkhas to stretch out along a thousand-mile frontier in Sabah and Sarawak, more British helicopters sent to the Far East, thereby wasting a lot of petrol running around the place, holding mock exercises over Singapore to test the air defences and so using up jet fuel? Selling guns to themselves to create a war? These are the parrotted recitals, a conglomeration of pseudo-Marxist-Leninist assertions - all to explain away the folly of their past mistakes, their policies pursued in selfish party interests that led them to a dead end. Sir, we are not naive enough to believe that the British, the Australians and the New Zealanders come to our aid purely for reasons of charity, humanity, and love of democracy. Of course, the British would like to keep their economic interests in this region. Of course, they want to keep a foothold - if not a foothold at least a toehold - for their military interests and military influence to extend over this area. And, of course, they want to keep their lines open with New Zealand and Australia. But the acid question is: is it in our interest and the collective interest of nearly 11 million Malaysians to have them fighting on our behalf, or out of this country with us fighting on our own? That surely is the acid question, is it not? If they are bad for us because they are pursuing their wicked selfish interests which undoubtedly they are, then we should get rid of them. But I would like to hear reasons why we should. And if they are cogent, convincing reasons, then surely you will carry the masses with you. Why should the Naval Base be shut down, Tengah shut down, Changi shut down'? So that there will be peace in South-East Asia and we can have more cultural troupes coming from Jakarta, and we can send the Member for Jurong to learn Malay in Jakarta? And so we will all be friends together and brothers in South-East Asia? Why not'? But first we must test the credibility of these possibilities. Mr Speaker, Sir, if the British had that capacity of foresight, if they knew in 1962 (just before the Brunei revolt and just before the first act of intervention by Indonesia into our affairs) that they would find in 1963/64 an evergrowing commitment in defence expenditure - Gurkhas, helicopters, aircraft carriers patrolling these waters -- I suggest that they might have taken a different policy decision on the future of Sabah and Sarawak. The curious thing about the whole of the Indonesian line is not that Singapore is joining Malaya as neo-colonialism but Sabah and Sarawak. But like the British, our problem now is not what the balance of interests was before Malaysia was formed, but what is the balance of conflicting alternatives now facing us. Where do we go from here to face up to the future? On our part, we have no doubts in our mind that if the boundaries of Malaysia were reduced or altered in any way as a result of Indonesian pressure, then our own future is in peril. For then the whole of South-East Asia becomes softened up for further encroachment and expansion by the strongest power in this region. If there were no confrontation, perhaps we might believe that we would get rid of the bases as an act of friendship to our neighbours. But no man in his right senses doubts that if there were no British bases in this region today, confrontation would not have stopped simply at sporadic guerilla raids, bomb explosions and subversion. The people are resigned to the fact that for a long time we shall be dependent on foreign assistance to keep the Indonesians from eroding the boundaries of Malaysia. But the more British, Australian and New Zealand forces are used on the ground either in Sabah and Sarawak or in the peninsula in Malaya, the more Malaysia is thrown psychologically on the defen sive, and having to explain to the Afro-Asian world why its nearly 11 million people are still unable to do its own mopping-up operations of a few platoons of guerillas. In a nutshell, the problem that faces us is how to get into a position where we can maintain indefinitely a firm shield against Indonesian attack with unflagging support from our allies and without draining our economic resources. What our enemies want to see happen is our gradually being bogged down in a situation where we face more and more economic disaster and chaos, with more and more arms chasing our own tails, and being finally squeezed from outside and disintegrating from inside. We have moved this amendment, Sir, not because we believe that the Central Government will suddenly expand its training resources and facilities to build an army comparable to Indonesia's. If the Central Government were to begin to raise an army comparable to Indonesia's, i.e. about 40,000 of Malaysia's 10 to 11 million people compared to 400,000 of Indonesia's 103 million people - but now, according to President Soekarno in Ponyang, it is 104 million; every time he speaks he represents more people, stronger men -- there will be an enormous increase in our defence expenditure, about four-fold. We have got about 10,000 now. If you multiply by four, it is going to have some very unpleasant effects on our economy. But it is our hope that by this stand we will give a lead to our people to face up to our responsibilities. Whilst a large stand ing army to emulate Indonesian proportions may be extravagant and unwise, yet a territorial army of week-day civilians trained at week-ends who can be called upon to assist the regular army in maintaining the security of the nation is a feasible proposition which can be achieved at little cost provided the people are prepared to make the effort. Next time, if a landing were to be attempted say at Tuas in Jurong whilst the regular forces were defending the shore line, and if the Member for Jurong were to mount another offensive with probably more calamitous results than the one he mounted in Hong Lim, then we would not have to waste our troops chasing him and his few friends. We would have the Singapore Territorial Army to look after them. In moving this amendment, I suggest to the Barisan Sosialis that we are making it clear to ourselves, our own people and to our neighbours that we understand what the stakes are in South-East Asia.

Mr Speaker, Sir, a motion of high treason has been tabled before this House by the spokesmen for Jakarta, and I wish to speak a little on this motion. First of all, I wish to ask the Members opposite whether they will clearly tell us that they are speaking on behalf of the people of Singapore, the people of Malaya, the people of Sabah, the people of Sarawak, or the people of Malaysia. Mr Speaker, Sir, at the recent sittings of the Central Parliament, only the Members of the Barisan Sosialis were against effective national defence for Malaysia. During these two days, the spokesmen for Bung Soekarno again spoke of anti-conscription. I would like to ask them again, are they really loyal to Malaya? Are they really looking after the interest of the people of Malaya? Mr Speaker. Sir, you are aware that Indonesian terrorists had invaded Malayan soil in Muar. This was the third landing of Indonesian terrorists in our country. We are indeed fortunate that the people are loyal to Malaysia. They reported immediately to the security forces about the landings of the invaders. These invaders were all rounded up in a short time. Mr Speaker, Sir, if the people were to listen to the evil speeches of the Barisan Sosialis and did not co-operate with the Government but assisted our enemy, then the third landing of Indonesian terrorists would not have been so easily wiped out. Members of the Opposition should be loyal to the country and make concrete and responsible criticisms of the Government. They should not be speaking on behalf of the enemy in order to gain sweet favour from them. Mr Speaker, those traitors who have helped to destroy our country will pay heavily for what they have done. History too has recorded the tragedy of a traitor who sold his country. I wish to draw the attention of the Opposition to the tragedy of a Chinese traitor, Wang Ching-wei. I am afraid they will share the same fate if they pursue an anti-national movement. Sir, they are complaining furiously that Malaysia is causing hardship to the people. But, Sir, they have highly praised the so-called guided democracy of Indonesia. They have praised their policy of asking people to eat rats and jagong. They even feel that the moon has a better shape in Indonesia than the moon in Malaysia. Mr Speaker, Sir, at this very moment, they are still shouting that Malaysia is neo-colonialist. I wish to draw their attention to the recent Conference of the non-aligned nations in Cairo. There were more than 40 leaders from the nonaligned countries who attended the Conference. These leaders turned a deaf ear to Soekarno's anti-Malaysia policy. Do you think that if Malaysia were a neocolonialist set-up, these non-aligned leaders would have turned a deaf ear to Soekarno? Certainly they would have supported him. This is clear proof that Malaysia is an independent sovereign country. Mr Speaker, Sir, I will now come to the question of the British forces here. The Barisan Sosialis have time and again said that Malaysia would be an independent country if British and other Commonwealth troops were kicked out from Malaysia. On the other hand, they say that they are loyal only to Malaya and not to Malaysia. What sort of dirty logic are they telling us, Sir? During these two days' debate, the Members opposite have called upon this House to support Azahari, the champion of the anti-Malaysia movement. Sir, as you are aware, Azahari, and may be the Barisan Sosialis Members who have disappeared from this House, are still in Jakarta engineering to send Indonesian terrorists into Malaysia to destroy us. Sir, Malaysia is a fully independent country. But the Barisan are still condemning us when friendly nations assist us to protect our country. Mr Speaker, Sir, Malaysia is a young and weak nation with an army of only 10,000 troops compared with the 400,000 strong army of Indonesia. If friendly countries like Australia and New Zealand had not come to our aid, what would have happened to us? I see no reason why we should not accept military aid from friendly countries when they are willing to give it to us unconditionally. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Barisan Sosialis and pro-Communist elements across the Floor will be very happy to see Malaysia crushed. Members of the pro-Communist front across the Floor should stop using their out-dated anti-fascist, anti-imperialist and anti-colonialist slogans as they will deceive the people no more. They should be aware that only two or three Communist countries sympathise with their masters in Indonesia. They should know that the rest of the world fully recognise Malaysia as an independent sovereign country. Therefore, the question of Malaysia being a neo-colonialist plot is all bunkum. Mr Speaker, Sir, to protect the lives and property of our Malaysian citizens, I wish to give my full support to the amendment of the Deputy Prime Minister. 4.11 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, since the Assembly resumed last year, the anti-national elements sitting opposite have wasted a lot of the time of this House by shouting their anti-Malaysia, anti-foreign, anti-imperialist and anti-colonialist slogans. Apart from this, they have also openly declared that the guerilla warfare in North Borneo is a war of national liberation. 4.14 p.m.

When debating the Yang di-Pertuan Negara's policy speech last year, I said that they were doing so in order to advance the cause of the Communist movement. As the open front organisation of the Communists, they have united with the old boys' associations and trade unions to carry out anti-national activities in order to destroy Malaysia because they know that the ultimate aim of Malaysia will be to bring about a more prosperous, peaceful and independent nation. This is what the Communists do not want to see happening. In the past one year - Mr Koo Young left the Chamber.

(In Mandarin): He is afraid. He can stay. For one year, the Barisan Members have been selling themselves to their foreign masters to destroy Malaysia. More and more of the workers who were formerly with them have come over to our side. Many old boys' associations have also stopped their anti-national activities and dissociated themselves from this anti-national group. Why have the Barisan Sosialis come to this end? The reasons are very simple. Our nation is truly independent now. Our Government is formed by the one-man-one-vote system. It is formed by popular election. The fate of our nation is in the hands of every citizen. Every citizen under a democratic government can enjoy the right of education and other facilities. In Singapore, the popularly elected Government is carrying out various projects to serve the people. Mr Deputy Speaker, since the formation of Malaysia we have entered a new epoch and a new industrialised society is in progress. In the not too distant future, we will be able to give more and better employment opportunities to the people. This is what Malaysia will bring about. But the anti-Malaysia traitorous Barisan group are still stubbornly holding on to their past idea, persisting in their anti-national line, thus showing their true nature of collaborating with foreign masters and being traitors to our nation. From this, we can see their demeanour of being subservient to their foreign masters. This is also proof of their high treason. There are several reasons to suggest this. Firstly, before Mr Chor Kok Thong, a member of the Barisan Sosialis Central Committee, left for Communist China, he announced to the Press that he had never been loyal to Malaya. Yesterday I gave the Barisan Sosialis a chance to explain this. But up till now, no reply or explanation has been given. Last year when the House opened a new session, the Barisan Sosialis had pledged to preserve, maintain and protect our Constitution. But the actions taken by the Barisan Sosialis in the course of the past year have shown that they have eaten their words, going counter to what they have announced in this House. Secondly, the Indonesian landing in our territory is an act of aggression and yet the Barisan Sosialis claim that this is because of the forma tion of Malaysia, thus showing that they are foreign agents and traitors in our midst. Thirdly, enemy troops have landed in our territory. There have been a series of landings in Johore. Muar and Malacca. The Barisan Sosialis have never condemned them. This fact also goes to show that the Barisan Sosialis are in collusion with foreign enemies. So this shows that the Barisan Sosialis are foreign agents amongst us, creating trouble in our State, as evidenced by the demonstration held recently against conscription. They wage their campaigns against this nation, thus exposing themselves as traitors. If they are loyal to our country, then they should appeal to the people to respond to conscription. Instead, they urge the people to oppose conscription and to ask for the withdrawal of British bases here in order to see our country enslaved. I would like to ask you, Mr Deputy Speaker, how are we going to protect ourselves and our sovereignty and independence without including bases? If Indonesia were to declare war against us, would the Ba risan Sosialis be able to persuade their Indonesian masters to reverse their policy and save our country? Do they have this magic power to repel the Indonesians? The Barisan Sosialis' stand before and after Malaysia has always been the same. They want to push the people into the sea. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in our midst, there is a group of traitors. These people are reactionaries according to Communist terminology. Such people, according to the practice in Communist countries, are sent to the Siberian labour camps. These people have been trying to make our country subservient to a foreign power. They have even lauded the landing of foreign troops in our territory. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the wheels of history are ever moving forward. Anyone who wants to turn them back will be discarded by the people and trodden under. Our struggle against colonial rule ended in September 1963. The past era has gone, never to come back again. I would like to ask the Barisan Sosialis to understand this well, otherwise they will disappear forever from the minds of the people. 4.25 p.m.

(In Tamil): Yesterday and today, the Barisan Members in their speeches have proved that they are enemies of their own nation. They form their policies in accord ance with those of Indonesia and the Communist countries. Foreign troops have come into our land. The Barisan argument is that at this juncture we should be subdued and that we should go down on our knees to seek peace with our enemies. These people are neither loyal nor grateful to the country. The people understand this very well. When foreigners threaten the sovereignty of our country, we have to resort to national service registration to protect our lives and property. Either the Barisan speak in their dreams, or they are not aware of local conditions. We know the inner feelings of these people.. They seem to live in a world of dreams. Their influence is decreasing day by day. Their supporters are disappearing day by day. In order to raise the hopes of their followers and keep their influence going, they are resorting to this tactic of opposing national service. Their propaganda will not be believed by the people. In the last referendum and in the last elections, their tactics were understood by the people. When Rome was burning, Nero, the emperor, was playing his fiddle. That is the kind of action the Barisan are following. If they are really loyal citizens of this country, they should join the forces and help defend the nation. But since they are supporters of Soekarno and his policies, they are opposing national service. If a man is a loyal citizen of this country, he will be prepared to lay down his life in its defence. He will be happy to register his name for national service to fight for his country. But if he opposes national service, then we call him a traitor. The Barisan are singing their old song of opposition to Malaysia. More than 75 per cent of the people voted for merger and the formation of Malaysia. How can they claim that this was forced on the people? In the 1963 general election, the people further endorsed the policy of merger and Malaysia. The eyes of the people are not shut. They realise the real situation as a result of the referendum and the election. All the Barisan's talk really shows their deceitful character and the deception that they try to practise on the public. The people have no choice but to laugh at the tactics of the Barisan. Although there is an armed attack by the masters of the Barisan, that is, the Indonesians, we have been able to defend ourselves. Will the Indonesian stooges play to their tune and carry out their propaganda? They are in favour of international communism. They have to change their tactics and policies. We do not know when they are going to be nationalists. They say that Malaysia is a warmonger, but the people know who is really in favour of war. They also say that we have to go according to the policy of peaceful co-existence. The Indonesians have landed at Labis, in Johore, and near Malacca. Who is attacking whom? Soekarno is attacking Malaysia. So the Barisan do not actually know what is happening. Even if they do not know what is happening, they should know from the newspapers what is happening in the United Nations. So we are the sufferers from Indonesian aggression. In order to defeat our enemies and defend our country we have to enlist in national service. I support the amendment of the Deputy Prime Minister. 4.32 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this motion concerns the question of Indonesian aggression and the loyalty of the Barisan Sosialis to our nation. Indonesian aggression by air, sea and land shows that the territories of Malaysia are now subjected to the conditions of war. No one who is loyal to his country can connive at this aggression. This is an act of robbers and thieves. The motive of the Indonesian aggression is very clear. It is none other than territorial expansion and the diversion of the attention of the Indonesian people from their suffering. Everyone knows that Bung Soekarno is a very ambitious person, but with the encouragement of Indonesian Communists, Indonesia harbours imperialistic inten tions against Malaysia. So in order to do their work as lackeys of Indonesia, the Barisan Sosialis have to do something on this side to gear their behaviour and actions to Indonesian aggression. They have been bragging so much and bluffing the people here without knowing that their lies will never be taken seriously by the people. They know that they are slaves of Indonesia. That is why the only way out for them is very simple, and that is to sour up the relationship between the people and the Government and to lead Indonesian troops into our territory. It is regrettable that they should act so foolishly. The speeches that they have made over the past few days contain a lot of old tunes and hackneyed phrases that they have repeated time and again in the past. In fact, we expected to see more intelligence in the Opposition Members but we have been very disappointed, I am sorry to say. This is the Opposition now and they do not deserve any credit from any quarter. The speeches that they have made are not in any way different from those made by Dr Lee Siew Choh in this House and others like him. I hope that they will realise their foolishness and, amend their ways. Instead of opposing national service, they should give their support to this righteous cause so that Indonesian aggression may be stopped in time. Perhaps by so doing there will be some hope for the Barisan. But they never wake up to the realities of life. Even internally the Barisan Sosialis arc split on the question of national service. The Socialist Front in the Federation of Malaya support national service, and the Singapore Barisan Sosialis have to keep quiet about it in the Federation Parliament. But now they have the audacity to come here and talk against national service. They do so because they are without enlightened leadership. They are just like blind men groping about in the dark. They do not really know what they are doing and what to do. In fact, they are against everything that the P.A.P. is doing for the people. They have to go against the P.A.P. in spite of all the good things that we have done for the people in order to save their own face. The people are very clear in their minds that we are now faced with the threat of Indonesian aggression. But the slaves of Indonesia who have found their way into the Barisan Sosialis are trying to sour up the good relationship between the people and the Government. We must tell the people now that the No. 1 enemy of our nation is Indonesia, and the No. 2 enemy is the Barisan Sosialis. As a sovereign independent nation, Malaysia is an emergent nation in this region. In order to stop aggression from a foreign source, we have to resist whatever acts of aggression that are carried out. On the other hand, we have to look after the welfare of our people internally. But unfortunately we have some Indonesian agents in our midst. So it is our duty to wake the people up and show up these foreign agents and reveal them to the people for what they are. We know that as long as parliamentary democracy exists in Singapore, we will give the people every opportunity to decide who is right and who is wrong. Our Opposition Members are just like a mouthpiece of Radio Jakarta. They are propounding Indonesian opinion in this House as though they are Radio Jakarta. But they have overlooked one point, and that is that the suffering and misery that Indonesian aggression has brought to our people has produced more widows and orphans in our country. A lot of families have been broken up because of Indonesian aggression, but the Indonesian slaves in our midst do not want to take cognisance of these facts. Let me tell them simply this: why do we want to break up Indonesian aggression'? As far as the Malaysian people are concerned, we are better off in all respects than the Indonesian people. That is why we do not want Indonesia to interfere with our affairs. We have every right to defend our nation and our way of life. We have a good system of parliamentary democracy. Compared to the so-called guided democracy of Indonesia, we are far better off. The Indonesian leaders shout slogans about revolution every day. Bung Soekarno can only do this in his own country, hut when he goes abroad, he enjoys life and acts in a different way from that of a revolutionary. But the Barisan Sosialis are singing high praises of Bung Soekarno in spite of his shortcomings. There is a great difference between the livelihood of our people and that of the Indonesian people. If the Barisan Sosialis imagine that there is a great paradise in Indonesia, that Bung Soekarno is an enlightened leader, then I have to tell them that such imagination is too fantastic. Since we are better off than Indonesia in terms of material benefits, let us talk about spiritual conditions. We enjoy full freedom in this part of South-East Asia. We have freedom, but freedom does not mean that we should give freedom to our Indonesian agents to lead Indonesian troops into our territory. Freedom does not mean that we should allow the enemy in our midst to act freely in order to undermine our nation. We should not have a misconception about freedom. This wrong impression that the people might have been given should be corrected. The freedom that we enjoy is not enjoyed by the Indonesian people. The Barisan Sosialis have full freedom to speak in this Chamber. They can say whatever they like here. So they have no excuse to say that we have not given them freedom of speech. They have the freedom to scold people in this House and to abuse others, but we should not give them the freedom to spread rumours, because rumours are dangerous to our nation. So there should be certain limits to freedom. Those peace-loving people who want to preserve freedom in the proper sense should expose the Barisan Sosialis because they do not say what they mean. Their words are not the same as their acts. Instead of protecting peace and promoting freedom, they are undermining both these precious characteristics of a democratic country. Their intentions are very clear. They want to create trouble and chaos in this country, to cause more strikes and to undermine our economy so that in the last analysis they will put all blame on the Government. This is what they are trying to do. They try to put the blame for the suffering brought about by Indonesia entirely on the shoulders of the Government. They are trying to stir up feelings of discontent among the people against the Government. But they have already lost in Malaysia. They are not successful in what they do, otherwise they will not be in the embarrassing situation as they are in now. They are trying to guide the wolf into the room to eat up the children. They are trying to help Indonesia to crush Malaysia. I wish to take up the argument of the Member for Thomson about Malaysia not being invited to the Cairo Conference. He said that this is proof that Malaysia was a neo-colonialist country. But I want to ask hurl whether China took part in this conference. If not, can we then say that China is a neo-colonialist country? Switzerland and Norway did not take part in the Cairo Conference. Can the Member also say that they are neo-colonialist countries? To say that those countries which have not been invited to the Cairo Conference are neo-colonialist countries is sheer nonsense. In fact, the non-aligned nations at the Cairo conference are not sympathetic towards Indonesia.

(In Mandarin): Mr Deputy Speaker. Sir, yesterday the Member for Paya Lebar introduced a motion in this House opposing conscription. At a time when the Indonesians are intruding upon our land and when enemy troops are committing aggression against us, thus endangering our lives and property, he does not want to take up arms in defence of our country, although he is a representative of the people. In addition to that, he has collaborated with the enemy and has acted as the mouthpiece of Indonesia. He is like Wang Ching-wei in Chinese history. He can even exceed Wang Ching-wei in the way the latter sold China to Japan. The Barisan Sosialis are against conscription. They claim that the reason is that Malaysia is a neo-colonialist product, and since Indonesia is opposed to neocolonialism, therefore, they should also side with Indonesia and oppose Malaysia. This logic of the Barisan Sosialis is absurd. Their efforts in opposing Malaysia in the past three years have all been futile. Malaysia has the support of the majority of the people. At the National Referendum held on the 1st September, 1962, the people voted in favour of it. There was a mission from the United Nations to assess the wishes of the people. There were elections in the Borneo territories. All this proved that the concept of Malaysia was in accord with the wishes of the people. The recent general elections also go to prove that Malaysia has the support of the majority of the people. The Barisan Sosialis' stand on Malaysia has been discarded by the general mass of the people. Therefore, the establishment of Malaysia is the fulfilment of the desire of the peoples of the territories concerned. It is not, as the Barisan Sosialis have termed it, a neo-colonialist product. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Member for Thomson has also said that their Party have carried out door-to-door investigations, and have visited the electorate. They have claimed that, as a result of these visits, they have found that the people were not in favour of Malaysia. What is the true fact? Wherever they went they were scolded and rejected by the people. On the question of conscription, according to the statement by the Central Government, there were 14,800 odd youths of various races who came forward to register themselves for national service in May. The figure is about 80 per cent of that for last year. Also in March this year, about 100 youths from Singapore went to Port Dickson to undergo training. Thousands more youths have responded well to national service. This is in contrast to the attitude of traitors like the Member for Thomson and other Members opposite. I feel they have no place to hide themselves. The Opposition Members have also mentioned the Cairo Conference. But I would remind them that the outcome of the Cairo Conference was that a statement was issued the contents of which were contrary to the wishes of their master, Soekarno. As a result, Soekarno did not sign the final document of declaration. I would like to enlighten these internal agents of the contents of the declaration. It embodied the statement of respect for national integrity and sovereignty and freedom from foreign aggression. Does this not imply a censure against Indonesia for its aggression against our territorial integrity? Today all peace-loving people of the world know that Malaysia is a country subjected to aggression by Indonesia. But regrettably the anti-national elements in our midst, namely, the Indonesian running dogs, have considered Indonesian aggression as a war to liberate this territory. They regard our own troops as foreigners and our measures to conscript as a form of suppression. At this time all the loyal people are united to defend our territory. Yet these foreign slaves and running dogs in our midst do not want to rise to the occasion and awaken themselves. Their end will be just like that of Wang Ching-wei, the traitor of China.

Mr Deputy Speaker, I think the Barisan Assemblymen have tried their best to confuse the issue over the question of national service and conscription. So it is profitable, I think, if we can get the picture clear. In no democratic country normally are people allowed to go against conscription in times of emergency or war. Only what are called conscientious objectors, pacifists, Quakers and extreme pacifists and so on go against national conscription for the views they hold. Otherwise we cannot conceive of any group of people who, in a national crisis, want to go against national service. Yet the Barisan Sosialis and their friends propagate this line. There are various reasons why they are doing this. But what we on the Government side cannot understand, and the people at large fail to understand, is that the whole world, except Indonesia, have extended recognition to Malaysia. Even Communist States recognise Malaysia as a sovereign and independent nation. Indonesia, of course, does not recognise us. The question arises, why does Indonesia not recognise us? The Indonesians, or rather the Indonesian Government, say that Malaysia is a neocolonialist creation because the British agreed to allow Sabah and Sarawak to achieve freedom and independence by merging in the new Federation of Malaysia. Until five months ago, the merger of Singapore with Malaya was not considered a neo-colonialist act by the Indonesian Government. Radio Republic Indonesia had even referred to the referendum in Singapore. You will remember, Sir, that at the conferences in Manila and Tokyo, President Soekarno referred to the necessity for self-determination for the people of Sabah and Sarawak only. He made no reference to Singapore. Now, Indonesian Government leaders have called for the liberation of not only Sabah and Sarawak but of Singapore. Not only Radio Jakarta, but also Radio Kemam and Radio Kalimantan Utara have called for the liberation of Singapore and Malaya as well. The charge of neocolonialism can remain a charge. But the Indonesian Government had to follow up this charge first with economic and then military confrontation. They can call us a neo-colonialist creation a million times. That will not matter. But it is confrontation, military, economic and political subversion as an instrument of confrontation which makes it necessary for us to make a stand against the Indonesian Government. The reasons why the Indonesian Government have found it necessary to carry out confrontation, as they call it, against us, is the absence of internal opposition of any considerable strength in any of the four States towards Malaysia. The situation was completely different in the case of the Central African Federation involving Northern Rhodesia, Nyasaland and Southern Rhodesia. There, at that time, the problem of the white settler population in the three States had a lot to do with the opposition to the Federation. The Central African Federation broke up. Now the Federation of Malaya is a federation where the majority of the people in Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore, before joining the new Federation, voted in favour of a democratic system. They voted in free, democratic and secret elections to join Malaya in the new Federation. The Barisan Sosialis leaders and their Assemblymen, although ideologically pro-Communist or perhaps Communist, are at the same time Chinese by race. Now as Malay I can better understand their position than many could.

Order. The House is suspended until 5.30 p.m. Sitting accordingly suspended at 5.00 p.m, until 5.30 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.30 pin.

Debate resumed.

Mr Speaker, Sir, as I was saying before the recess, the Barisan Sosialis leaders and their Assemblymen, although ideologically pro-Communists or perhaps Communists, are, most of them, at the same time, Chinese by race. I think the Members of the Barisan Sosialis are in a dilemma. They are unable to detach themselves from the Indonesian line spread in so many devious ways. For example, they are unable to detach themselves on this question of confrontation locally manifested by their policy of anti-national service. They cannot move themselves away from this Indonesian line of the charge of neo-colonialism. Indonesian confrontation appears in two aspects. The first is an ideological one, pursued by the P.K.I. more than any other group and Soekarno. The P.K.I. - Parti Kommunist Indonesia -is against Maphilindo, which is the new name for the old theory of Indonesia Raya. The other aspect of confrontation is a racial one pursued by the Army, upholders of the theory of socio national-Marhaenism, first propounded by Soekarno and now pursued by many people like the late Professor Mohamed Yamin - a racist theory. Actually this racist theory based on socio-nationalism, terms which are the reverse of Hitler's national socialism, today is supported by many political groups, big and small. If confrontation and the charge of neo-colonialism is pursued only by the P.K.I., then the Barisan Sosialis can line up with the Indonesians only along ideological lines. But the Barisan Sosialis leaders know deep down in their hearts that this charge of neo-colonialism, this confrontation which they are supporting, is actually double-edged. It is also inspired at the same time by a racial theory, manifested by Maphilindo or Indonesia Raya for Melayu Raya directed against the Chinese in Indonesia, in Malaysia and in South-East Asia. Why indeed should President Macapagal want to join Maphilindo, the Malays in this country can easily understand. But unfortunately, they, the Barisan Sosialis leaders, do not seem to understand. For the last 10 years there have been in the Philippines efforts directed against the Chinese by legislation, to drive them out from the rural areas and even from the urban areas, in the field of commerce and industry, something which the Indonesians tried to do beginning in 1955, particularly in the rural areas, and which they have failed to carry out successfully. As a matter of fact, the unenviable position that the Barisan Sosialis members have manoeuvred themselves into, does not permit of any initiative at all on their part today. They are caught in their own fire, so to speak. They must listen to Radio Kemam very carefully, and this is a piece of advice I want to give them. Listen in to Radio Kemam - tonight, if possible, or on all following nights. They will find that Radio Kemam - incidentally, for their benefit, I want to explain what the name "Radio Kemam" means. Now, the man Ibrahim bin Haji Yaakub, in Indonesia known as "Iskandar", was a Malay school-teacher who emerged in Pahang in 1939. He had collaborated with Japanese spies, and when the Japanese invaded our country (then a colony of Britain), Ibrahim bin Haji Yaakub belonged to a movement called the "Fujiwara Kikan". They were the big overlords then, and Ibrahim Yaakub later became a Colonel in the Japanese-sponsored Army called the "Giyu Gun". He fled from Malaya before the British re-occupied our country and today he is a Member of Parliament - correction, they do not have a Parliament now, they have a People's Consultative Congress like Communist China - representing Rhiau for Soekarno. Now the movement led by Ibrahim bin Haji Yaakub was called "Kesatuan Melayu Merdeka" and it was fashionable then, like now, to abbreviate words by their first syllables. In Jawi, of course, the abbreviation of "Kesatuan Melayu Merdeka" is KEMAM. Now, this movement of "Kesatuan Melayu Merdeka", ever since Ibrahim bin Haji Yaakub fled to Indonesia, has been renamed "Kesatuan Malaya Merdeka", also known as "KEMAM" in abbreviation. This Radio station, which used to broadcast to boost up the morale of people like the Members of the Barisan Sosialis before us here, pumps out day in and day out - if they care to listen, which 1 think they should - this racial theory, which unfortunately probably the Members opposite do not understand, because it is in the Malay language, although they call themselves loyal citizens of this country. Day in and day out Radio Kemam spouts this racial theory. They will find that Radio Kemam reflects the thinking of the racialists, not only those around Ibrahim bin Haji Yaakub in this country, but also those in Jakarta. Now Radio Kalimantan Utara is something else. That is the station run by the Barisan Sosialis colleague, Shaik Azahari. Let me ask them one question. How do the Barisan Sosialis Members think the Indonesians are going to solve what the Indonesians call "the Chinese problem", if they succeed in confrontation in Singapore and Malaya'? I hope they will try to answer this question. The Barisan Sosialis, in pursuing a policy of anti-national service, have unwittingly helped the cause of the Indonesian motivation of confrontation, although in supporting confrontation they would want to help the reasons which motivate the P.K.I. Here is where they cannot detach themselves from the other. They are caught in both. Before Malaysia was horn, the Barisan Sosialis might have opposed its formation purely on ideological grounds. That was the reason we understood why they opposed Malaysia and merger. Of course, they opposed merger for their own selfish reasons. Their position is somewhat different today. For example, they are unable to imagine whether they will want to go against national service. If, for example, the Army under Nasution, and the Right-wing leaders and racists take over control of the Indonesian islands, they are not in a position to decide this eventually today. I really feel sorry for them. Mr Speaker, Sir, in connection with this indecisive attitude which the Barisan Sosialis Members and their leaders have manoeuvred themselves into, I am reminded of a story told me about 10 years ago about a Japanese woman who was a recent convert to Christianity who went to church on a Good Sunday morning. There is no intention to show disrespect to the Japanese people. It is just a story of a Japanese woman. While listening to the church sermon, every time God's name was mentioned she half-stood up, took off her hat and sat down again. But every time Satan's name was mentioned, she did the same thing. Now she was not very sure, so to be on the safe side, she did what she did. You will have noted that when General Gusti Djatikusomo, who was then Consul-General in Singapore and later became the Indonesian Ambassador in Kuala Lumpur, was in this country, he was very fond of putting on the national costume of Javanese royalty, because he belonged to the Royal House of Surakatta. He is a Raden - that is the Javanese name for Raja or Tengku in this country. The costume he wears consists of a headgear in typical Javanese style, a double-breasted tunic with buttons going diagonally across the breast, and a typically Javanese-painted sarong, complete with royal chapals. The Army in Indonesia, on the other hand, have their military uniform, trousers and all. Sir, the Barisan Sosialis Members are so involved with all and sundry, with the Indonesian confrontationists, including the P.K.I., Parti Murbah, Indonesian racists and others - and because they are tagging on so hard to the Indonesian sarong and trousers, one of these days the sarongs and trousers of all of them - Aidit, Subandrio, Soekarno, Mohamed Razif, Djatikusomo. Nasution and all the other racists one of these days their trousers and sarongs will fall off, and the Barisan Sosialis Members will have to face the naked truth! But, I suppose, Sir, between the P.K.I. and the Indonesian racists, the Barisan Sosialis would prefer the P.K.I. But sad to say, theirs unlike the Japanese woman whose choice is between God and Satan, will be between two unmentionables! 5.43 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have the good fortune to be a Member of this Assembly as well as of the Central Parliament, and I notice a strange and significant difference in the attitude of the Barisan Sosialis Members in this Assembly and in the Central Parliament. Here they are like wounded lions, while in the Central Parliament they are like half-dead mice. This resolution should properly be tabled in the Central Parliament, because this matter is one properly within the purview of the Central Parliament. But their representatives have never dared all this while to bring up this question before the Central Parliament. They are, however, prepared to do so in this Assembly for reasons which are quite obvious, because they know that in this Parliament, despite their talk about dictatorship and so on, there is more freedom of speech and more liberty for them to say what they want. Mr Speaker. Sir, the core of this matter is more or less enshrined in the motion itself and in the amendment to the motion. The operative phrase in the main motion by the Barisan Sosialis is the allegation that the present policy of military expansion and war is by the Alliance Government - their thesis is that confrontation is really military expansion by the Alliance Government, whereas we contend in our amendment that it is Indonesia's policy of aggression and subversion. So the question is, who is the aggressor? They contend that Malaysia is the aggressor but we contend that it is Indonesia who is the aggressor. Sir, there is an obvious definition as to who is the aggressor. As far as I know - the Barisan Sosialis can correct me - there is not a single Malaysian soldier in any Indonesian territory, there is no Malaysian paratrooper in any Indonesian territory, and there is no subversion by Malaysia going on in any Indonesian territory. But in Malaysia there are Indonesian paratroopers and Indonesian soldiers, and there are Indonesian-trained Malaysian traitors in our midst. The Barisan Sosialis in their speeches yesterday and today have never made one word of criticism against Indonesian aggression. They deny the existence of Indonesian aggression but their masters, the Indonesians themselves, are quite open about it. They admit there is aggression. I refer to a document called "Malaysia's Case in the United Nations Security Council". It is a report of the proceedings in the United Nations and the Indonesian representative, unlike the Barisan Sosialis, did not bother to disclaim that Indonesian soldiers are not committing aggression. I quote an extract from the speech made by the Indonesian representative at the United Nations Security Council in which he said: 'I would not deny that our volunteers, our guerillas together with militant youths of Sarawak and Sabah, some of whom had been trained in our territory, have entered the so-called territories in Sarawak and Sabah. They have been fighting there for some time, this is no secret.' And yet the Barisan Sosialis in their speeches imply that there is no Indonesian aggression when their masters openly said in the Security Council that there is aggression. And they said, "What of it; we are sending soldiers, we are training Malaysians to infiltrate into Malaysia, to indulge in acts of sabotage." The report goes on to say: 'And now this fighting has spread to other areas in Malaysia beyond Sabah and Sarawak such as Malaya. Why is Malaysia so gravely concerned now that it requests a meeting of the Security Council?' The stooges of the Indonesians pretend that there is Malaysian aggression but their masters openly admit that they are committing aggression, they are prepared to go on with the aggression. So why make a fuss about it'? It goes on to say: `As a matter of fact, the fighting now in Malaysia is on a very small scale compared to the magnitude of the fighting in Sarawak and Sabah.' The Barisan Sosialis denies that there is aggression, whereas the Indonesians do admit that there is aggression. In all the speeches of the Indonesian representative they have never claimed that there is a single Malaysian soldier in Indonesian territories, and yet the Barisan Sosialis motion talks about military expansion and war by the Alliance Government. Where is the war by the Alliance Government? Which war? Sir, as we all know - but I do not want to go into too much detail - apart from the Russians and the Czechs, the Afro-Asian countries in the Security Council voted in condemnation, directly or indirectly, of Indonesian aggression in Malaysia. So it is only the Barisan Sosialis and their Indonesian masters who claim that Malaysia is committing aggression. In fact, the Indonesians do not claim that, only the Barisan claim it. Why, therefore, is the Barisan Sosialis pretending and perpetuating a falsehood that there is Malaysian aggression'? There are two reasons for it. First, the domestic quarrel inside the Barisan Sosialis. You will remember, Sir, about a year ago, the present leaders of the Barisan Sosialis - some of whom are here-took the line that they would oppose conscription under protest, not opposing conscription, but Dr Lee Siew Choh condemned them as supporting British imperialism. He took the line that there should be total opposi tion to conscription. So now orders have come from outside compelling them to eat humble pie, and that is what they have been doing the last two days. They have been trying to outbid Dr Lee Siew Choh in following his line, and to that extent they respect Dr Lee Siew Choh who turns out to be more correct in interpreting Communist policies than the Boy Scouts of the Barisan Sosiahis, amateur revolutionaries who try to curry favour with Peking and Jakarta. So today they have to bring up this motion in order to out-manoeuvre Dr Lee Siew Choh. They know that Dr Lee Siew Choh's line has gone down better in their Party than their amateurish attempt to play both sides, to be constitutional politicians and revolutionaries. That is one reason why I submit, Sir, they have brought up this motion - to show to their followers that they are more revolutionary than Dr Lee Siew Choh who has said some very harsh things about them. I do not think I will tax the patience of this House by pouring out the abuse that Dr Lee Siew Choh has levelled at them. The other reason is the realisation by the pro-Communists in the Barisan Sosialis that they cannot hope to capture power in Malaysia, constitutionally or unconstitutionally, by persuasion or by violence, and they know that the only way the Barisan Sosialis or the pro-Communists can come to power is with the help of Indonesian bayonets. My colleague, the Minister for Finance, said earlier that they have no chance, either constitutionally or by violence, of becoming Commissars, Ministers, or Parliamentary Secretaries except by leave and licence of Indonesia. Let me quote another document if they think that the Indonesians are going to spend money, to sweat, and to shed blood to make these people Commissars. They arc mistaken because there is another document called "Indonesian Involvement in Eastern Malaysia". This is a report of some interview with certain members of the C.C.O. - Clandestine Communist Organisation in Sarawak. It says: `There is a good deal of anti-Chinese feeling within Indonesia and the Government may not wish to advertise their support' - that is the Indonesian Government - `for a Chinese movement. To certain neighbours and international audiences Indonesian propaganda claims that Malaysia is in danger of being taken over by Chinese Communists. Indonesian opposition to Malaysia is an attempt to prevent an outpost of Peking being established in South-East Asia.' It goes on to say: `Some of the Indonesian authorities' caution about aiding the C.C.O. is reflected in the statements of the Chinese who have been captured or surrendered on their return from Indonesia to Sarawak.' It goes on to say: `The Indonesians have formed no exclusive Chinese volunteer Unit. The Chinese are indeed a minority in the Units in which they have been incorporated. Nor have all the Chinese sent across the frontier by the C.C.O, been recruited into the existing volunteer formations. They have simply been kept in reserve.' Then it quotes from a C.C.O. volunteer who defected: `On going back to Indonesia after the attack, I found the Chinese in the Unit singled out for harsh treatment by the Indonesian Company Commander. Their freedom of activity was severely restricted. There was no medical attention, and they were subject to rigid discipline. Bong deserted and had crossed the frontier once again in October 1963.' So, Sir, if the Members of the Barisan have any expectation that the Bung is going to nominate them as Commissars or Ministers, I think they should meet some of the Members of the C.C.O. who had unpleasant experiences of what the Indonesians' real intentions are in regard to Malaysia. They will be lucky if they can become junior doormen in an Indonesian Malaysia. So it is true, Sir, they have no choice. As a Communist outfit they carry out orders regardless of the consequences for themselves, regardless of whether that is the right policy to advance even Communism in Malaysia. They are the instruments of Indonesian expansionism. They talk about military expansion and war by the Alliance Government, but the truth is, there is Indonesian expansion and they are the instruments of Indonesian imperialism. There is one thing about the Indonesians, and that is, they are more open and frank about what they want. In May 1945 the late Professor Yamin made it quite clear what are Indonesia's ultimate objectives in this part of the world. It is published in booklet form which has been reproduced in local publications. In May 1945, at a meeting of Bagan Usaha Persiapan Indonesia - Investigating Committee for the Preparation of Indonesia's Indedence - Mohamed Yamin said, amongst other things, as far as he could see it, independent Indonesia should be grouped as follows - first, the former Dutch colonies comprising Sumatra, Borneo, Java, Celebes and so on. Then areas within the war zones - Papua and so on. Third, Portuguese Timor and North Borneo. Fourth, the Malay Peninsula (including the island adjacent to it), that is, the following four States - Trengganu, Kelantan, Kedah and Perlis. The adjacent island is Singapore. In his speech he said: `To separate Malaya from the rest of Indonesia amounts to deliberately weakening, from the outset, the position of the people's State of Indonesia. To unite Malaya to Indonesia would mean strengthening our position and completing our entity to accord with our national aspirations and consistent with the interests of geo-politics of air, land and sea.' Then Soekarno at the same meeting endorsed Professor Yamin's thesis. He said: `I have never said that Indonesia comprises only those areas which were ruled by the Dutch. In fact, I have on one occasion in my life dreamt of a Pan-Indonesia which would include not only Malaya and Papua (that is, New Guinea) but also the Philippines. For that reason, I am in full agreement with the stand taken by my colleague, Mr Yamin, who said yesterday that neither on moral grounds nor on the grounds of international law are we obliged to be the inheritors of the Dutch.' Then he went on to say: `God in his wisdom has mapped out this earth. Everyone looking at the world map will understand what God has ordained as is shown on the map. God has determined that certain parts of the world should form single units. God has also determined that, on the map which he has created, the Japanese Isles should form one single unit. And when I look at the islands situated between Asia and Australia and between the Pacific and the Indian Oceans, I understand that they are meant to form a single entity. For that reason, I shall support in this meeting those who advocate that independent Indonesia should extend to Malaya and Papua. We are not inheritors of the Dutch. Malaya is already in the hands of the Imperial Japanese Government, and so are Papua, North Borneo and Timor.' So, Sir, right from the start, the Indonesians had expansionist aims - to include all those islands and territories, to quote Soekarno, "comprised within the Pacific and Indian Oceans and between Asia and Australia." The Barisan Sosialis have now become the stooges to carry out Indonesia's expansionist plan. You will remember, Sir, that the people then dismissed all these things as a madman's dreams. In China, at the turn of the century, there was the famous Tanaka Memorial devised by Japanese imperialists for the conquest of China and the rest of Asia. And when the plan went through, the Japanese too had their Wang Ching-wei's. He was killed by the Japanese, but here in the Indonesian context we have the Barisan Sosialis playing that role, becoming traitors to their own country. It is not new in the Communist movement for Communists to become traitors to their own country. During World War II, I remember the Communists in Britain and Western Europe were for years demanding that the Western countries should wage an aggressive war against Germany and against the Fascists. But when Stalin signed the pact with Hitler, they switched their line and they said, "No, this is an imperialist war." And in India, the Indian Communist Party also said, "Yes, this is an imperialist war. Indian nationalists should not participate in it. They should fight the British, and should not participate in an imperialist war." But when the pact was liquidated by Hitler, and Germany attacked Russia, once again the instructions came, "No, no, it is not an imperialist war, hut it is the people's war." And it is this role that the Barisan Sosialis are playing. They have instructions from the international Communists - there are two international Communist forces today - that they are to play the role of traitors; they are to betray their country. You will notice, Sir, that they have been talking about coercion, that the Central Government is coercing youths to undergo military training. They have been criticising that. But have they criticised their own friends, their own comrades who go to Indonesia, to the school for training traitors? They have never condemned them. They are receiving military training there, and being sent back. Why have they not a word to say about Indonesians training our youths to kill our youths'? They have nothing to say. They are training Malaysians to come back to kill Malaysians. What have they got to say? Is that not coercing youths, training youths to murder, sending them as cannon fodder into Malaysia'? We saw recently in Labis, an Indonesian, not a Malaysian, who was sent here - what did he say? He was an Indonesian patriot. At least, I respect him, Sir, because he was fighting for his country, but not the Barisan Sosialis. They are fighting as traitors for some other country. And he, an Indonesian patriot, Soetikno, what did he say, when he landed in Labis? What kind of war are the Indonesians fighting here, and what kind of war are the Barisan Sosialis supporting'? The question was asked of him ---

Would the Minister quote the paper and the date?

I am sorry, Sir. Thursday, 1st October, 1964, the Straits Times. One question: "Are you aware that among the political agents in your airdrop group there were Communists?" Answer: "Not among the military personnel, but among the Malayan Chinese, yes. They were all members of the Communist Party." Question: "Just now you said you have known these people for only a short period. How could you know they were Communists?" Answer: "My superiors told me. They were brought to Java to be trained for infiltrating into Malaya." The Barisan Sosialis talk about oppression, that people do not support Malaysia. Here is what an Indonesian said, a man who came, risked his life to fight for Soekarno. He was asked. "How do you feel towards Soekarno's regime, now that you have been misled?" "As soon as I arrived here I noticed that the various races live harmoniously, and I realised that what was told to me was all wrong. I hope that Soekarno will realise his mistake and recall the negotiations that have taken place between Indonesia and Malaysia so many times in the past." Then he was asked, "Would you describe the landing as a complete flop?" "Yes, as we did not get any support from the people." They have been talking for the last two days that the people are opposed to Malaysia, that the people are opposed to this war. Here is an Indonesian who says he is convinced - "Yes, we did not get any support from the people. My own personal struggle was an empty one. For 20 days I was in the jungle." Sir, lest they think that this Lieutenant, Soetikno, is a traitor, let me quote from a recent broadcast from Radio Jakarta about this lieutenant, before they say that this chap is a traitor, that the Malayan Government had bought him over. This is from the Monitoring Digest issued by the Ministry of Culture on Wednesday, 4th November, broadcast on 3rd November. The broadcast says: 'According to the statement by the Tunku Abdul Rahman regime, it would appear' - Sir, this is in regard to the recent dropping of pamphlets - 'as if the pamphlets were signed by an Indonesian volunteer, Soetikno.' The statement says: 'The Indonesian people' - I hope the Barisan Sosialis Members will take due note of this - 'should feel proud that volunteer Soetikno in the face of encirclement by 5,000 mercenaries who are stationed in Malaya could have sustained himself for that long.' At least, Sir, I hand it to the Indonesians. Even their traitors they praise as patriots. Our friends here, our Malaysians, consider our patriots traitors. And I notice that every time Radio Jakarta refers to the Barisan Sosialis, they refer to them as patriots. When an enemy refers to somebody in our country as patriots, it must mean that they are traitors. So the Indonesians themselves have correctly assessed the role that the Barisan Sosialis play. They are patriots in the eyes of the Indonesians because they are traitors in the eyes of Malaysians. Therefore, Sir, this motion by the Barisan Sosialis is really an attempt to disarm Malaysians, to hand them over, to make us defenceless. What they are telling us is this, "Let the Indonesians fight. If they bomb and kill our fishermen, bomb our cities, commit sabotage, not a word of criticism." But if we defend ourselves against the Indonesians, that is criminal. That is coercion. What does that mean? They are playing their allotted role. They want to tie our hands behind our backs and hand us over to the Indonesians to be raped, to be looted, and eventually to be colonised by their masters. They are not interested in what the people think of them. They know what the people think of them. There was a referendum, there was an election, and the people gave their verdict. And a month ago in Hong Lim the people melted away. In fact, there was a reporter there who told me that for the first time, when the police moved into the Chinatown area to round up some of the Indonesian sheep, the people were happy. They said they were trouble-makers. There was not a single protest, not a single jeer at the police, because for the first time the people knew about the Barisan Sosialis; that they are the forward base for Indonesian aggression against Malaysia. So their real reason for bringing up this motion is not to convince us or the people but to convince Indonesia, their masters, that they are doing their job well. I can bet my last bottom dollar, Sir, that tomorrow's Monitoring Digest will contain all the speeches from the Barisan hut not a single speech from this side. And Radio Jakarta will come out and say that the patriots in Malaysia condemn conscription. That I say, Sir, might be commendation for them from Indonesia, but it will be condemnation by the people of Malaysia of the Wang Ching-wei's created to their own folly, to their own stupidity. And as the lieutenant from Indonesia said, he discovered that he had wasted his life on behalf of Soekarno.

(In Tamil): Mr Speaker, when we analyse the motion of the Barisan Sosialis, we will find that they do not wish Malaysia to exist. If at all it is to exist, it must be subservient to Indonesia. Therefore, they do not recognise Malaysia as an idependent nation. They do not like Malaysia to exist as an independent nation. For the last 140 years, we have been subjected to colonial rule but now we are independent. But the Barisan Sosialis Members are still subservient-mined. The Britishers have gone but the Barisan Sosialis want us to be subservient to Indonesia because they cannot get rid of their subservient attitude. In order to guard and defend our nation, the Government has brought in national service but these people, who are the agents of the Indonesian Government, want to oppose it to prove to their Indo nesian masters that they are good servants. The Member for Paya Lebar claims that Indonesia is helping to liberate North Borneo. As far as the Singapore Government is concerned and as far as the Central Government is concerned, the people of North Borneo have chosen to be independent under Malaysia. The Indonesians send their lackeys; but the Barisan Sosialis do not understand this. The Member for Paya Lebar is proud of Indonesia but he forgets the treatment the Indonesian Chinese received from the Indonesian Government. The Chinese from Indonesia ran out of Indonesia to Singapore. If these Barisan Members still want to side with Indonesia, it is a wonder! If we do not defend ourselves from Indonesian infiltration, if we do not stop Indonesian troops from coming in, and if Soekarno succeeds in controlling us, he will bring about the economic stagnation that already exists in Indonesia. Because we do not want to be subjected by Indonesian forces and the Indonesian Government, our Government is taking steps to train our young people for national service. We, along with other nations, do not want to wage war, but if foreign nations want to carry out aggression against us and control us, we cannot wait and allow them to swallow us. We must defend ourselves. The defence of our nation is not contrary to the maintenance of peace. The Deputy Prime Minister has said that because of our long relationship with Britain, we have a defence pact with her. Just because of that, no one should accuse us of being a neo-colonialist country. When Indonesia gained independence from the Dutch, it broke off friendly relations with Holland. Now, the Indonesian Foreign Minister flies to the Dutch capital to have meetings with the Dutch Foreign Minister to beg for help. Can we therefore claim that Indonesia is now again a neo-colonialist country? Now, we in Malaysia are faced with emergency conditions. Enemy troops have invaded our territories. Therefore, it is the duty of every loyal citizen to defend this country. No country in the world does not recruit its youth for military training. The Member for Bukit Merah stated certain pre-conditions for the country to be independent. Indonesian troops must clear out of this country and then only can our people live happily. We can only pay full attention to our economic development when Indonesian troops are cleared out. The Barisan should understand these pre-conditions for our peace and prosperity. Therefore, they should inform their master, Soekarno, that he must withdraw his troops. To muster our forces to defend our country does not mean that we are war-mongers. As far as Malaysia is concerned, there is no ground for this accusation. It would be difficult to accuse a small nation like Malaysia of wanting to crush Indonesia. Just because we are small the Barisan want us to be subjected by Indonesia. Even big nations like Russia enlarge their forces and acquire nuclear weapons to defend themselves. Our case has been brought up in international councils and we have gained a lot of sympathy. But here, in this House, some of our own people's representatives attack us for resorting to national service to defend ourselves. These are the traitors that we have in this country and in this House. The Barisan should be ashamed of themselves for this. It is the Indonesians who attacked us. If they had not done so there would have been no need for national service. In order to defend ourselves, we have to resort to national service. Instead of supporting the Government, the Barisan are opposing national service. Even if they do not want to help the Government, they should stop opposing national service and hindering the efforts of the Government. Therefore, I call on them to be more reasonable and patriotic.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, yesterday and today we have heard statements made by the Barisan Sosialis which show that they are acting as agents for the Indonesians. It would not be far wrong for us to say that they are actually the henchmen and lackeys of the Indonesians. The Barisan Sosialis have played an active part in the cause of Indonesian confrontation. They spread false propaganda to instigate the various races in this country to fight one another, to instigate the people against the police, and to train people to become guides for Indonesian soldiers. The reason why the Barisan Sosialis are against conscription is that they can demoralise and weaken our country to enable them to carry out their nefarious designs in league with the Indonesians. If it is true that they are working for the interest of our people, then why do they not blame the Indonesians for the atrocities that they have committed? Instead, they blame us for wanting to defend our country. It is only insane people who believe in the Barisan Sosialis.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, originally I did not wish to speak because many of my colleagues have spoken. But in view of the speeches made by the Barisan Members, I have to say something. As long as the people of Malaysia and Singapore have the interests of the nation at heart, they should all condemn the Barisan Sosialis for the shameless speeches that they have made in defence of Indonesian atrocities committed in our territory. The people who have the interests of the nation at heart will never excuse them for what they do. The Member for Paya Lebar shouted yesterday in this House that they wanted peace, that they did not want war. His behaviour was very much like that of a comedian on the stage shouting words which do not mean anything. They say they are against war, that they desire peace, but they open the back-door secretly to let in the Indonesian troops who are carrying out incursions at places which are within 25 miles of Singapore, namely, Muar, Pontian and Malacca. And even in Sarawak Indo nesian troops are killing our people, wrecking our installations and damaging our property. The people of our nation suffer misery. Their families have been broken up by the Indonesian troops. Despite all this, the Barisan still want us to get foreign troops to withdraw from our country. The Indonesians have already pointed their guns at us. Perhaps the guns are not being pointed at the Barisan Members. That does not matter to them. Because of this they hope that the people of our nation would be devoured up and handed over to Soekarno. They say that the P.A.P. describes all those who are against the P.A.P.'s policy as anti-national. But we have ample evidence to show that the P.A.P. has not smeared the Barisan Sosialis when we call them anti-nationals. Who does not want peace? Who does not want to live in peace and happiness? All along it is the policy of our people to live harmoniously with our neighbours. All along we have been adopting a good neighbour policy. We want to talk peace and we have broken away from colonial rule in a peaceful way too. The Member for Jurong spoke yesterday in this House in defence of Indonesian atrocities. He mentioned the third landing by the Indonesians in Malaysia. He was taking the matter rather light-heartedly, as though to suggest that the, invaders were coming here for a holiday, like American tourists. I would like to ask him whether he knows that the Indonesian terrorists who have come here fully armed are not holiday makers. Does he not know this is a fact? I am quite sure they know this in their own heart of hearts. Furthermore, the Member for Tampines is not only against conscription but he also goes to the extent of saying that Malaysia is not fully independent. I feel it is a pity that he should have said such words, that Malaysia, which has been accepted by the people, does not enjoy full independence. And yet he is paid out of public funds to be in this House. We have seen the provisions of the Constitution. And in this Chamber he tries to deny us our sovereignty and our independence. He is behaving like an Indonesian and any other Communist. According to what he says, "Malaysia is not an independent and sovereign nation." The Sin Chew Jit Poh made a report of his speech, which shows that he was speaking in his capacity as a national traitor. What is more absurd is the speech made by the Member for Bukit Panjang. He quoted a Chinese proverb to the effect that "Good iron is not meant for making nails." He also quoted another Chinese proverb that "Good boys are not meant for the army." This is fantastic and out-moded. They talk about wanting peace and are against war. If the Member is really sincere about his pursuance of the policy of peace and opposition to war, then I would suggest to him here, in all earnestness, that they should ask his old friend Soekarno of Indonesia to make an appeal to the able-bodied youths in Indonesia not to join the army for the purpose of invading Malaysia. They should ask Indonesia to stop sending their armies to our country and causing damage to our property. They should also ask their good friends not to change the good iron into weapons and use them against us. This in fact is what they should do. If they can do what I have suggested, that is by appealing to Indonesia not to turn able-bodied youths into soldiers, then they will prove themselves to be nationals instead of anti-national elements.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, the Member for Jurong and the Member for Paya Lebar have jointly tabled this motion. This is a matter of regret, for this motion amounts to abetting the Indonesian aggression against us. I am wondering whether these two Members have already forgotten their allegiance to Malaysia and to Singapore when they took their oath in this House. Otherwise they should not make such state ments and speeches in their capacities as Members of this House which will help the Indonesians. After listening to their speeches and their reasons for opposing national service, we are saddened by their stubbornness and dogmatic analysis of events. They could only recite those hackneyed speeches made by their foreign masters. They have not been able to advance any convincing reasons. Their subjective and irrational speeches do not deserve our rebuttal, but in order to enable the people to understand their conflicting analysis and to see through their falsehood, it is necessary for me to make a reply to their speeches. The Member for Paya Lebar said yesterday that the formation of Malaysia was contrary to the aspirations of the people in Malaysia. His contention is that the people in Singapore do not have the same citizen status and, therefore, the Barisan Sosialis elements will not be able to take part in the Federal elections and also that there is not enough freedom of expression, assembly and publication so as to enable them to serve the cause of the Malayan Communist Party and to expand their anti-national activities. Because the formation of Malaysia has conscribed their anti-national and traitorous activities, they say Malaysia is against the wishes of the people. I would like to ask the Member one question. Whether he has forgotten that merger and Malaysia have been brought about after the Referendum in which 75 per cent of the people in Singapore cast their votes in favour of merger and Malaysia? And in last year's general election in September, the great masses once again cast their votes for the P.A.P. when they went to the poll on a Malaysian platform. The Barisan Members claim that they always abide by the wishes of the people. In actual fact, they are going against the wishes of the great majority of the people on the Malaysia issue. How can they explain away their stand? Are they of the view that only those who support the Barisan Sosialis represent the wishes of the people and that those who are against their traitorous activities are not the people? The Member for Paya Lebar also touched on the question of loyalty and on the various kinds of war. He said Indonesia's aggression against North Borneo is anti-colonialist, anti-imperialist, and is a just war. As such, the people in Malaysia have no obligation to defend their own country and their territorial integrity. His speech negates the fact that Sabah and Sarawak are part and parcel of the Malaysian territory. This goes directly against their Oath of Allegiance to Malaysia in this House. Is there anything more shameless than their attempt to hand over our land to our enemy, a land to which they have sworn their allegiance? Is this not a traitorous act and high treason? The Members of the Barisan Sosialis, in order to cover up their traitorous nature and to confuse the people, also talk on the question of loyalty. But what is the object of their loyalty? According to them, they are loyal only to Malaya plus Singapore. They even boasted that they were prepared to sac rifice their lives for the territorial integrity of "our country", i.e. Malaya plus Singapore. On the 19th of October last year, the Barisan Sosialis in the 36th issue of their Party organ, issued a statement in which they said Malaya should have territorial integrity and sovereignty, and that this was their basic Party stand. "We are prepared to give up our lives at any time to go to the forefront of the battlefield to defend our homeland." This was stated in their Party organ, The Barisan, in their policy statement. Their then Party Chairman, Dr Lee Siew Choh, in the form of questions and answers which appeared in their Party organ of the same issue, gave his reply to these questions. One question was, "If our country is invaded by foreign powers, is our Party prepared to resist foreign forces?" His reply: "Malaya is our fatherland. We will go to war to defend our fatherland." Another question was: "If Malaya including Singapore is invaded by other countries, is the Party prepared to come out to defend it?" Answer: "Since Malaya is our fatherland and if it is invaded by other countries, of course, the Party will come out to defend it." Mr Speaker, Sir, in the 38th issue of their Party organ, published on the 3rd of November last year, there was an article on the question of loyalty. In this article, the Barisan Sosialis reaffirmed and stressed that "Malaya is our fatherland. We shall unhesitatingly sacrifice all our lives and property to defend our fatherland." In January 1964 on New Year's Day, the Barisan Sosialis Chairman in his New Year message reaffirmed his Party stand. He said, "Our stand is that we should have full sovereignty and territorial integrity. If any other nation invades our fatherland, we will be the first to oppose such an invasion in defence of our fatherland." Mr Speaker, Sir, I have been quoting statements made by the Barisan Sosialis in order to ask them: Do they recognise their own Party's policy and statements? Do they admit that Malaya should have its territorial integrity and sovereignty? Do they admit that they should be loyal and should sacrifice all their lives to defend their fatherland? If they do not want to contradict what they have said and what their Party have said in their Party statement, then we shall ask them: Is Pontian part of Malayan territory? Is Labis part of Malayan territory, and is Malacca part of Malayan territory? I am asking them on the basis of their own speeches. The Indonesian armed invasions at Pontian and Labis (recently they have also landed in Malacca at Sungei Kesang) are acts of open aggression committed by Indonesia against Malaysia. All nations with a sense of justice, even the Security Council of the United Nations, have accepted our complaints against these aggressive acts of Indonesia. 6.54 p.m.

Since the Barisan Sosialis Members have sworn loyalty to Malaya, so far we have not seen that they have shown any intention to sacrifice themselves to defend their fatherland and to condemn Indonesia's aggressive acts. 1 would like to ask them: Why should they not mean what they say? Why do they not condemn Indonesian aggression? Why do they not adopt concrete steps to defend their fatherland, that is, Malaya? In view of Indonesia's aggression and subversion, and in view of the grave situation arising from their aggression and the loss of lives, they know full well that Indonesians have carried out their aggression on Malayan soil. Why did they stage a demonstration against national service on the 12th of September? Why should they bring up this motion to oppose national service? In bringing up their anti-national service motion, do they mean to oppose the Indonesian aggression in defence of our fatherland or do they mean to sell out our fatherland to Indonesia by abetting their aggression? All these facts go to prove that their real aim of opposing national service is to weaken our defence against our enemy, so as to allow Indonesia to slaughter our people. This is an unpardonable act of treason. In the 62nd issue of their Party organ, which was published on the 26th of October, there was an article with the heading, "We must talk about facts and reasons." This article reads as follows: 'We, the people in Malaya, only recognise Singapore and Malaya as our fatherland. So far there have been no Indonesian troops in our fatherland (Singapore and Malaya) to attack the Malayan people. Therefore, we do not think that at the present moment, Malaya has been threatened with aggression by Indonesian or North Borneo guerrillas. We have not been attacked by another country or invaded by other people. How can we keep shouting that other people have been invading us when their troops are not here? How can we say that somebody has committed aggression against us?' These are facts and reasons given by the Barisan Sosialis. They say that since others have not sent any soldiers to attack us, we should not condemn them. But now I would like the Barisan Sosialis to reason with me and talk about truth. Has Indonesia sent its troops to our territory, our nation, to land on Pontian, Malacca and Labis? Are Pontian, Malacca and Labis part of the territory of Malaya, or are they part of Indonesian territory? Should we not condemn Indonesia? Do the Barisan Sosialis now dare to condemn Indonesian aggression? Indonesia's blatant aggression against Malaya is now very clear for all to see. They are unwilling to condemn Indonesian aggression, on the other hand, they oppose conscription to defend our country. I would like to ask them: What kind of act is this? Is it a patriotic act or a traitorous act? If the Barisan Members think themselves to be real patriots and their Party a patriotic Party, then I should say that their patriotic ideology is to work for the overthrow of the elected Government by force and to support Indonesian soldiers to raid the Borneo territories. They regarded Indonesian invasion of Sabah and Sarawak as support and obligation by the Indonesian people to the just war of liberation waged by the people of Sabah and Sarawak. That is their patriotic stand. They do not oppose Indonesian aggression against Malaya, but they oppose conscription to defend Malaysia. On the one hand, they encourage Indonesia to invade Malaysia, and, on the other hand, they oppose conscription in our country. This is another show of their patriotic act. Let me ask them: what country do they love and to which country are they loyal? Obviously it is Indonesia, and not Malaysia. Yesterday the Member for Bukit Merah said that Malaysia has been isolated by Afro-Asian nations, and Malaysia has to ask for military aid from Britain, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. This shows that he is stubborn and does not like to face naked realities. Has he forgotten that the Security Council has debated the question of Malaysia's accusation of Indonesia's aggression? Has he also forgotten that of the 9 countries which supported the draft resolution in support of Malaysia two were African countries? Indonesia was in fact isolated because it drew support only from two. And at the Cairo conference of non-aligned nations, Indonesia wanted the conference to condemn Malaysia in its declaration, but was rejected. Soekarno was so furious that he left the conference and refused to sign the declaration. Has the Member for Bukit Merah not read in the newspapers about the Indian Prime Minister, Mr Shastri's support for Malaysia? The reason for requesting military assistance from the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand and not from Afro-Asian countries is very simple. Afro-Asian countries are engaged in their own internal development, and are not in a position to provide us with material support. They can only give us moral support. But in the face of naked aggression, moral support is not enough. We need guns and soldiers to defend our country. In fact, many emergent countries in Afro-Asia are in receipt of foreign military aid to build up their defence strength. India, Cambodia, Ghana, and even Indonesia are receiving foreign military aid and no one has accused them of losing their in dependence thereby. Facts have already proved that the Barisan claim of wanting to defend Malaya and wanting to sacrifice their lives for Malaya has all along been a falsehood. They oppose conscription because they do not want the people of Singapore themselves to defend their homeland. They want Indonesia to take over our country. So we cannot support the motion which attempts to sell out our country. As our bounden duty to our country, we have to move an amendment to the motion and ask the Central Government to train our youths to prepare them to defend our integrity and sovereignty. 7.07 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Deputy Speaker, from yesterday until today the debate on our motion before this House moved by our Member here has been a heated one. Members on the Government side have been defending their position in regard to Malaysia. I do not like to reply to every point raised by them in their speeches because whatever they say are all stereotyped speeches, having come from the same Party. It should be enough for me to deal with the points raised by the Prime Minister and the Minister for Finance. If the Government side did not speak on the motion, they would feel embarrassed because they are members of the Party. But whatever they have said today, we already heard yesterday. And what we heard yesterday, we had already heard last year. They are just repeating themselves. So it will be enough for me to reply to and comment on what the Minister for Finance and the Prime Minister have said. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in summing up, they touched on our argument that Malaysia has brought suffering and misery to the people, thus causing the present unhealthy situation here. They also mentioned that we have been collaborating with Indonesia. If we were to talk about the confusion and Indonesian confrontation, we can never end, and it is not possible to arrive at a conclusion because we have to look into the causes which have led to the present situation. We should know that without Malaysia, there would not be this present state of affairs. There is no smoke without fire. So since there is such a serious situation, we know that it must have been caused by the formation of Malaysia. That is the proper approach to the question. This is what we must first know. The Prime Minister has said that troops from Britain, New Zealand and Australia are here to help us defend our country. The Prime Minister has even the guts and the cheek to defend British imperialists in this House. He has even claimed that the British do not want war. If there is war, then they will lose their interests. If it is so, then may I ask him why did the British not grant Sabah and Sarawak independence, according to an agreement reached in 1963 which gave Singapore full internal self-government? 1 say let these States be independent. Give them the power of independence, and then allow the people of these territories to decide for themselves whether or not they want to merge with Malaysia. Why do the British not want to let the people of these territories do so? Why should the British not allow the people of these territories to be self-governing and so to decide for themselves their political destiny? Why should there be elections under the aegis of the British? Our present Government is now under the full control of the British. In actual fact, there is no internal autonomy at all. Why cannot the British allow the people in these territories to be independent first? This is the root cause of the crisis in Malaysia now. If any political Party were to judge the present situation according to this basis, then it would be fallacious. The people of North Borneo wanted independence so that they could decide whether or not they wanted to merge with Malaysia. That is why Party Rakyat in Brunei has the support of the majority of the people there. They won the elections and are also very popular. Why did the British not respect the popularly-elected Government of Brunei'? Why did the British not respect the will of the people of Brunei who had elected their own Government and who had opted not to join Malaysia? Their wish had been expressed constitutionally. This is the main reason for the present situation in Malaysia. If we want to discuss this issue, we must first understand this underlying cause. The unilateral action taken by the British caused the present trouble in North Borneo. The people there wanted to decide their future political destiny by the system of one man one vote. The people of North Borneo adopted this system and voted in favour of independence. Why should the British Government not accede to their wish which was constitutionally expressed? Why should the P.A.P. now change their stand? But the determination of the people of North Borneo in their struggle will never change. They will never be as changeable as the P.A.P. The refusal of the British to allow independence to the people of North Borneo has given them no alternative but to resort to force. All other constitutional means have been closed. That is why there is now a military uprising. This is a reasonable uprising, internationally speaking. If there had been no suppression, there would have been no reaction by force from the people. It is violence meeting violence. Mr Deputy Speaker, the present war in North Borneo has come about through the circumstances that I have mentioned. Why do the P.A.P. Government not mention the causes which I have analysed with regard to the war in North Borneo? It is because they are afraid to face past history. They are afraid to bring out the true facts of the past and show them to the people of Singapore and Malaya. Mr Deputy Speaker, in Singapore, we wanted to have self-government, but we were forced to go into Malaysia. In 1963, according to our Constitution, Singapore had the right to send a mission to England to have further constitutional talks. At the time such constitutional talks could have been held. Why then were we denied this opportunity'? Why did Britain refuse to allow us this opportunity? The British rulers did not want us to succeed in further constitutional talks for their own interest. The Prime Minister has said that the British have very little investment in North Borneo, and there is not much investment in Singapore too. He says that Britain has most of its investments in Malaya. But, Mr Deputy Speaker, one must not forget that North Borneo is a rich country. Everybody knows that it produces oil, petroleum, rubber and other tropical produce. You cannot say that because North Borneo is not fully developed, it is a poor country. You cannot say that Britain has little investment there. You cannot say that Britain has very little interest in Singapore. If you ask yourselves in what way Britain can protect its economic interests in the whole of South-East Asia, you will then realise the value of the British military bases in Singapore. Are not the military bases in the interests of Britain? Can they be in the interests of our people? Mr Deputy Speaker, Britain knows that the five territories in this region are their last colonies in this part of the world. If they are allowed to gain independence, then the people will not allow the continued existence of British influence in this region. That is why Britain, through its agents, took the opportunity of combining the four territories into one political unit, so that British interests can be entrusted to the people in favour of Britain. That is why you can see that the Prime Minister and the Minister for Finance dare to talk in defence of British interests in this Chamber. They say unashamedly that British troops are here in our own interests. This shows how much trust Britain has placed in them. And how correctly such trust has been placed in these people! They have been very clever in combining these four territories into one political entity. If any people say that we are still under colonial rule, then Britain will say that we are already independent. They can say, "What more do you want to talk about? Formerly you were a small place. Now you are a bigger nation with 10 million people. What more do you want to grumble about?" In this way, the British are able to perpetuate their economic interests in this region. I have to remind the P.A.P. that they should not think that the British are really giving them all the powers. In fact, the British are still behind them. The Back-benchers may not realise this, but the Front-benchers know everything about the whole scheme. Perhaps they are not willing to let the cat out of the bag. Mr Deputy Speaker, the whole situation at the present moment is closely connected with North Borneo. The Prime Minister says that, on the one hand, we want to chase away British troops and, on the other hand, we refuse to serve in the army. He says that there is inconsistency in our policy. We have already said time and again that Malaysia has been formed by the British to look after their own interests. That is why it has been formed against the wishes of the people. As far back as 1961, the question of Malaysia was mentioned in Singapore. At that time many people in Singapore were against Malaysia.

I would like to inform the Member that he has up to 8.06 p.m. if he wishes to make full use of his time. If he does so, then a motion will have to be moved to extend the time beyond 8 o'clock.

(In Mandarin): Mr Deputy Speaker, I will try to finish my speech before 8 o'clock. When some people air their views against Malaysia, they are gaoled by the Tunku and the P.A.P. Even the Afro-Asian countries described Malaysia as a neo-colonial scheme in those days. We were warned that we should not fall into the British trap. Did you not hear of such views? Did you not take heed of the warning given by the Afro-Asian nations? No. You just went on your own way and, as a result, Malaysia was formed. Now they say that we are contradicting ourselves by wanting to chase away British troops and, at the same time, refusing to serve in the army. I have to explain our stand here. In the first place we know that British troops are based here not in our own interests. I have already dealt with this matter. When we say that we do not want to serve in the army, they say that by doing this we are actually inviting Indonesian troops to come over here. This is what the Prime Minister has suggested, and he has questioned our motives. We op' pose the stationing of foreign troops in Malaya. We have already stated our stand. We will talk about Malaya now. Before Malaysia British troops were in Malaya. After Malaysia British troops are still in Malaya. The same has been true in Singapore for the last one hundred years or so. We do not want to serve in the army because, in the first place, we want Malaysia to be scrapped and we want the Borneo people to be independent. We want British troops to withdraw from this area. We want the abolition of British bases too. Unless all this is done, we are not prepared to take up arms. The P.A.P. Ministers say that there are countries like Ceylon which have no hostile neighbours, and that is why such countries do not require foreign troops to help them. But they forget that countries like Ceylon are pursuing the neutral policy of the Afro-Asian countries. If we adopt the same policy, then the Afro-Asian countries will sympathise with and support us. If we contend that foreign troops should be withdrawn from our territory, then we will get the support of the Afro-Asian countries. If we tell the world that we want to stop aggression, then we will also get support from the Afro-Asian countries, provided foreign troops are withdrawn. Mr Deputy Speaker, far from doing all this, the Malaysian Government is implementing a pro-Western policy. It is in collusion with foreign powers to suppress the wishes of the people. The Minister for Education has said just now that we stated in our Party organ that in the event of aggression against Malaya, our motherland, we would come out to defend it. And yet he has accused us of not carrying out our promises. We are now in Malaysia and not in Malaya. You cannot deny that Malaya is part of Malaysia; you cannot deny that Indonesia is against Malaysia. The confrontation is directed at Malaysia and not at Malaya alone. You cannot say that Malaya is a separate nation as distinct from Malaysia. The Minister talks of Indian support for Malaysia. Now, it is not strange that India should support Malaysia, because Malaysia has openly supported India against China. So, one good turn deserves another - the help is mutual and so is the support. There is nothing strange about it. Mr Deputy Speaker. If you want to talk about the interests of the people of Singapore, then you have to ask what good has Malaysia done for the people of Singapore. There is tension and mounting unemployment in the island. So, as responsible representatives of the people, we have to speak on their behalf; and speak against conscription, which is opposed by our youths at large. As a Party of the people, we have to speak with determination for their interests. The P.A.P. Back-benchers state that we have not changed our stand all along. Yes, this is our loyalty and sincerity to the people of Singapore. We have been consistent all the time. We think that as long as Malaysia is not scrapped, the people of Malaya and Singapore will not have any happiness and that so long as Malaysia is in existence, there will be tension in Malaysia. We feel that if Malaysia is not scrapped, then the people in the five territories will not be able to live in peace. Because of this contention, we shall not give up our stand. We shall continue to fight for the interests of the people against Malaysia and against conscription. This is our attitude and stand. Of course, we cannot behave like other political Parties which change their stand from time to time according to which way the wind blows. No, we are not so opportunistic as they are. But the P.A.P. is. It is so mutable and opportunistic that it changes its policy from time to time. There was the May 13th incident which was mentioned by the Minister. This incident was fully exploited at that time by some of the Ministers. Now they are condemning it because times have changed and they have changed their stand. At one time they were in co-operation with Fong Swee Suan, Lim Chin Siong and people like them. They made use of the influence of these -

Is the hon. Member talking about conscription or is he talking about the P.A.P.?

Order. I think the Member is quite relevant. He may proceed. Time is short, so do not interrupt him, if possible.

(In Mandarin): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I am trying to finish, but if they want to challenge me to talk further, then the proceedings will be protracted. For their interests, they co-operated with Lim Chin Siong and they got into power. And after they had captured power, they changed their stand to sell away the people. They went into collusion with Britain. They went with the Tunku to have talks with Britain and arrested people like Lim Chin Siong who were anti-colonial fighters. At one time the Prime Minister begged Lim Chin Siong to help him out of his difficulties. But now he has changed. He himself has no influence, so he is making of the influence of the Tunku and Britain to strengthen his own position. While he is now in the Government, he thinks that by making use of the Tunku, he may be able to go right into the Federation Government. Mr Deputy Speaker, the Barisan Sosialis, which is as unchangeable as ever, is still against Malaysia which was not formed in accordance with the wishes of the people. Malaysia was formed to look after the interests of the British. That is why we will continue to go against Malaysia. Even if the Alliance Government puts us all in prison, we will continue to oppose Malaysia. This shows that our stand is always firm. Some hon. Members: Bravo, bravo!

Order, order. 7.40 p.m. Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out."

Division, Sir. The House divided: Ayes, 23; Noes, 6; Abstention, 1; Absent, 21. Ayes Noes Buang bin Omar Chia Thye Poh Junid Koo Young Chan Chee Seng Kow Kee Seng Chan Choy Siong' Ong Lian Teng Madam Poh Ber Liak Fong Sip Chee Tan Cheng Tong Govindaswamy, P. Ho Cheng Choon Abstention Ho See Beng Fong Kim Heng Lee Teck Him Lim Cheng Lock Lingam, S. V. Absent Mahmud Awang A. Rahim Ishak Mohd. Ariff bin Bani, S. T. Suradi Barker, E. W. Ng Kah Ting Chan Sun Wing Ng Yeow Chong Chio Cheng Thun Ayes(cont.) Absent(cont.) Ong Pang Boon Chow Chiok Hock Rahamat bin Kenap Goh Keng Swee Rajoo, S. Gonzales, R.A. Rodrigues,Bernard Jek Yeun Thong Sia Kah Hui Lee Kuan Yew Sim Boon Woo Lee Teng Tong Teong Eng Siong Lim Huan Boon Wee Toon Boon Lim Kim San Yaacob bin Loh Miaw Gong, Mohamed Al-Haj Miss Devan Nair, Mrs Ong Eng Guan Othman bin Wok Rajaratnam, S. Toh Chin Chye Wong Soon Fong Yong Nyuk Lin Question accordingly aggreed to. Question put, "That the words proposed to be inserted, be there inserted."

Division, Sir. The House divided: Ayes, 23; Noes, 6; Absentation, 1; Absent, 21. Ayes Noes Buang bin Omar Chia Thye Poh Junid Koo Young Chan Chee Seng Kow Kee Seng Chan Choy Siong Ong Lian Teng Madam Poh Ber Liak Fong Sip Chee Tan Cheng Tong Govindaswamy, P. Ho Cheng Choon Abstention Ho See Beng Fong Kim Heng Lee Teck Him Lim Cheng Lock Lingam, S. V. Absent Mahmud Awang A. Rahim Ishak Mohd. Ariff bin Bani, S. T. Suradi Barker, E. W. Ng Kah Ting Chan Sun Wing Ng Yeow Chong Chio Cheng Thun Ong Pang Boon Chow Chiok Hock Rahamat bin Kenap Goh Keng Swee Rajoo, S. Gonzales, R.A. Rodrigues,Bernard Jek Yeun Thong Sia Kah Hui Lee Kuan Yew Sim Boon Woo Lee Tee Tong Teong Eng Siong Lim Huan Boon Wee Toon Boon Lim Kim San Yaacob bin Loh Miaw Gong, Mohamed Al-Haj Miss Devan Nair, Mrs. Ong Eng Guan Othman bin Wok Rajaratnam, S. Toh Chin Chye Wong Soon Fong Yong Nyuk Lin Question accordingly agreed to. Original Question, as amended, put, and agreed to. Resolved, That, in view of the seriousness of the situation which will affect the lives and properties of the people of Singapore following Indonesia's policy of aggression and subversion, this House calls upon the Central Government to take all measures to secure the safety of the lives and property of our citizens, and for this purpose to give our youth proper military training to help defend the sovereignty of our nation.

Resolved, "That this Assembly do now adjourn to Thursday, 12th November, 1964" - [Mr Ong Pang Boon]. Adjourned accordingly at five minutes to Eight o'clock p.m. to Thursday, 12th November, 1964.