Here is a compilation of videos on Singapore by themes. These are not my videos. This is just a compilation for easy reference.
How Temasek became Singapura circa 1299. The burning of Singapura (1398), and again in 1613 by the Portuguese. Founding by Raffles. Japanese Occupation. Merger and Separation. Independent Singapore.
Singapore, the Accidental Nation
This YouTuber is more interested in Borders, but the first 6 minutes or so of the video covers Singapore's history and how we became, "accidentally" a nation. An independent nation.
The Country that didn't want Independence.
Covers the founding by Raffles, and the growth of Singapore leveraging on 3 historical events - the 1842 Treaty of Nanking that opened up China to foreign merchants, the industrial revolution in Britain, and the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869. The Japanese Occupation shattered the illusion of British superiority, and after the war, anti-imperialistic/anti-colonialism sentiments, and the British intention to pull of the Far East led to some self-government, and eventually to Merger with the Federation of Malaya. Then Separation and Independence for Singapore.
At 0:30 "Independence is something that other countries had to fight for... Singapore had independence thrust unwanted upon it... Singapore was thrown into the deep end, and it was "sink or swim".
Merger and Separation - a video:
Comment on the video:
"Some country had to fight for independence. We had independence thrust unwanted upon us. And while it was not completely one-sided, the notion that separation was "mutual" is simplistic. TAR [Tunku Abdul Rahman, the then PM of Malaya] and the Federal govt wanted a "Malay Malaysia" with affirmative action or privileges for the Malays. LKY realised that a "Malay Malaysia" would disadvantaged SG which has a Chinese majority (he pushed for a "Malaysian Malaysia" - factual correction by another viewer already made). And the federal govt moved to imposed many policies that would disadvantage SG. And the promise of a wider hinterland and market for SG failed to materialise. The conventional wisdom was that a small island city state would NOT survive. LKY subscribed to that conventional wisdom. Fortunately for SG, his compatriots - Goh Keng Swee, Rajaretnam, not sure if Toh Chin Chye was in on it - did not "have" that conventional wisdom and believe that SG would be better off on her own.
On the Malaysian/Federation side, they did not agree to Separation for the good of Singapore. They too subscribed to the conventional wisdom that a small island city state that was not even self-sustaining in Water was DOOMED. The purpose of letting Singapore go, was to TEACH SINGAPORE A LESSON. The plan was for Singapore to be cast off on its own, realise that a small island city state with no natural resources was GOING TO FAIL, learned that we cannot survive on our own, and crawl back to the Federation and ask to be taken back on their terms. By then the arrogant LKY would have learned how to eat humble pie, and be more amenable to the Federal govt's terms and conditions.
It was a good plan.
Unfortunately (for Malaysia), they didn't tell SG their plan.
So we made other plans."
Lee believed that Singapore's only hope of survival was Merger with the Federation. He believed it so that he made the effort to convince the populace of the need for Merger in a series of radio talks.
Malaysia-Singapore: What Really Happened.
From the video description
"It is generally accepted that most countries will do everything possible to retain control of territory, even in the face of considerable resistance from the area in question (0:42). Few states willingly give up land. However, the general view in international relations is that there is one notable exception in modern international politics: Singapore's apparent expulsion from Malaysia, in 1965. Coming just two years after Singapore had joined neighbouring Sabah and Sarawak as the new entrants to the Federation of Malaysia, it was widely seen as an important step towards regional security and political stability. However, tensions soon emerged between the two entities. Led by the two prime ministers, Tunku Abdul Rahman and Lee Kuan Yew, this eventually led to the decision that Singapore would have to leave the Federation. But rather than a unilateral move to expel Singapore, as many often believe, the story is in fact a little more complex. More to the point, at the time many saw Singapore's separation from Malaysia and independence as a temporary move. Both sides held open the door for eventual reunification."
Comment on the Video:
New "discoveries" about the events preceding Separation suggests, as you note at the end, that the separation was mutually and consensually negotiated. With some caveats.
Firstly, Lee Kuan Yew was, I believe, convinced of the conventional wisdom that Singapore was not viable (or survivable) alone, that Singapore's future was only assured if Singapore was part of Malaysia. To this end, he made a series of Radio "Chats" in 1961, arguing for why Singapore needed to Merge with Malaya. So when Singapore was "expelled" from the Federation, LKY felt it to his core. And he cried when he appeared on TV to explain to Singaporeans the "anguish" of Separation.
And yes, of course he kept open the possibility of re-admission to the Federation. As did Tungku Abdul Rahman, the then-Prime Minister of the Federation. As you noted, most countries are loathe to lose territories. So for the Federation to expel or agree to separation (or secession) by a state is unique and unprecedented (AFAIK). To perhaps understand this, one needs to understand the Malay preference for non-confrontational problem solving. (I see this in their parenting style.) Lee Kuan Yew was a problem to the Malaysian leaders. He was too vocal, and too rational, and cannot be beat in a debate. Moreover, debating him would just publicise the arguments against their policies. As you noted, first Tungku Abdul Rahman proposed confederation - "hiving off" Singapore from the Federation to be a confederated state.
Lee authorised Goh Keng Swee to negotiate with Tun Razak (DPM) on the status of Singapore. Goh had been sceptical of the advantage of Merger, and he counter-proposed complete Separation of Singapore. Tun Razak liked this. I believe it synch-ed with the Malay's preference for non-confrontation. The conventional wisdom (then) is that Singapore was too small to survive as an independent nation. It lacked natural resources, it depended on Malaysia for water, and it did not even have enough land to grow enough food to feed her people. How could Singapore survive? So, the solution (to the Malaysian Leaders) is to cast off Singapore (and Lee Kuan Yew) and let Singapore (and Lee) struggle to survive. After a few years of hardship and poverty, lean times and hunger, Singapore would probably come crawling back to the Federation and ask to be re-admitted.
On the Federation terms.
By then, the People of Singapore would have been so disenchanted by Lee and would have probably voted him out of office for leading them into those years of privation. But if by some miracle he was still PM of Singapore, the terms of re-admission would be that he step down from office and abstain from politics. Lesson taught and lesson learnt. I believe that was the plan. Except that Singapore did not know that was the plan.
And Lee and his cabinet made other plans.
And never looked back.
How did Singapore get so rich? Four videos. Four Perspectives.
The Fall of Singapore, 1942
Battle of Singapore - Animated History
The Fall of Singapore - Britain's Greatest Humiliation
About Singapore's Hawker Culture
Origins of some Singapore Creations. Kueh Tutu (with similarities to Malay Putu Piring, which may have been influenced by Indian Putu Mayam), Indian Rojak which was inspired by Chinese and Malay Rojak, is truly a Singapore creation - you cannot find Indian Rojak in India! Indian (or Mamak) Mee Goreng is also a local creation or adaptation. The Indian cooks added mutton to Mee Goreng (the Malays added prawns, tahu, sotong instead), and when they had taken all the meat from the cut of mutton, the bone was discarded. Back then. Today, it ends up in Soup Tulang. Other dishes described include Teochew Fishball Noodles, Teochew-Hokkien Mee (a.k.a. Rochor Mee); Mee Rebus; Kway Chap and the innovations incorporated in Singapore.
Heirs of Hawker Heritage - children of hawkers who carry on the legacy of their parents and even grandparents. And new Hawker-preneurs breaking into the sector. But for every "new blood" or young person entering the Hawker profession, there are tens or hundreds of aged hawkers in their 60s, 70s, and even 80s or older doing what they have been doing, and wondering when they can hang up their apron.
Video published on 20 Nov 2020. Rice. Rice noodles (Bee Hoon). Dishes made with Bee Hoon (Satay Bee Hoon, Laksa. Mee Siam.) Then lockdown (7 April 2020) due to Covid19. And the stress and challenge for hawkers to survive without dine-in customers. How the lockdown changed everything for hawkers (and F&B outlets). And how a new variation of Appam was created with cheese, parma ham and mushroom.
With the end of Circuit Breaker, hawkers re-emerged, adapting to new circumstances, new challenges in the new normal. And some of the older generation hands over to the next generation of hawkers. And there is hope for the continuation of Hawker Culture in Singapore... right?
Singapore's Hawker Centres - A UNESCO Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity
Two-part series on how Hawker Centres are critical elements of our Culture, as part of our Heritage, and as we sought UNESCO recognition of Hawker Culture as our Intangible Cultural Heritage.
Singlish. Or "Why we tok liddat one"
[This list is still being compiled and is incomplete. For a list of videos on Singapore (or relevant issues), see this Youtube playlist.]
No comments:
Post a Comment