Passing of a symbol of empire

The sometimes surprising but ultimately expected death of a queen as well as the gaining of independence.

THE passing of Queen Elizabeth II was simultaneously surprising and expected. Just a few days before her death she appointed the new British Prime Minister, Liz Truss – at 96 years old, the queen continued in her duty when others would have long passed it on.

Mixed among the praise of her life’s achievements were the reminders by snarky observers that Britain had once been a colonial power that treated its mostly unwilling subjects alternately with contempt, conniving and compulsion.

But it is paradoxical to blame Elizabeth II for colonial atrocities, given that her reign oversaw most of the decolonisation process, as the British empire began dismantling itself in the fallout of World War II.

Britain wanted a managed process of disentanglement, rather than a laissez faire approach to let go of as many colonies as those that wanted to leave.

This complexity is somewhat encapsulated in a Twitter exchange I read recently. One person wrote that the queen needs to be given credit for allowing Malaya to claim independence in 1957, saying that if she had not agreed that Malaya was ready, then it would not have happened. Yet somebody else replied to this, saying that because of the British policy of decolonisation, and because the Alliance party of Umno, MCA and MIC did so well in the 1955 elections, independence was inevitable.

But I would go one step further than that. I would say that the British had already planned to let Malaya go, even before the end of World War II. This can be gleaned in reading the inimitable collection of papers from the British government archives, edited by Prof AJ Stockwell as part of the British Documents On The End Of Empire Series.

The first step was to unite the Malay states into a single Malaya, grouping together the Federated and Unfederated Malay States and the Straits Settlements of Penang and Melaka. In particular, the objective was to improve the entire region’s economic development, and eventually transform all the states and territories into one self-governing nation (presumably one that continued a friendly relationship with Britain).

It’s important to note that this plan was being drawn up even while the Japanese were still occupying the states that would later make up Malaya. WWII was taking a heavy financial toll on Britain, and many countries in the British Empire, like India, had long campaigned for independence. Rather than having them splinter off through wars of revolution or uprisings, Britain wanted to manage the separation more amicably.

It is perhaps ironic that in trying to form a single Malaya, the British inadvertently created an Opposition party that would then become their partner in decolonisation. To form a single Malayan Union, they tried to force the Sultans to concede their authority, which in turn upset some Malay communities so much that it pretty much directly led to the formation of Umno.

Note that at this time, Umno wasn’t asking Britain to grant Malaya independence; it was actually asking for the special position of the Sultans and Malays to be recognised and upheld. The British felt the easiest way forward was to negotiate the conditions for the Federation of Malaya mainly with Umno, including the introduction of elections at some unspecified date in the future.

However, this then led other groups to feel they were not adequately represented. The Malayan Communist Party (MCP) took up the most extreme position and tried to force the issue with armed resistance, which then forced the British to declare a state of emergency.

It must be noted that at this point, granting independence was a distant, vague idea rather than some clear plan to be implemented. Yet, British commitment to the end goal was clear enough that the then high commissioner Sir Gerald Templer could announce in 1952 that posited “the earliest possible date for self-government at 1960”.

It was now clearly a question of “when” rather than “if”. Not all Malayan political parties could agree on the same approach. However, the rise of the Alliance party and its success in the 1955 elections, and Tunku Abdul Rahman’s deft handling of the MCP and of its leader Chin Peng, meant that the British now had a clear favourite as to who they would like to see running an independent Malaya.

I would argue that the British preferred a quicker handover, lest the political sands shifted and a less appealing political leader took over. So by the time the independence talks in London took place in 1956, it was more or less decided that Tunku’s suggested date of Aug 31, 1957, would be the one all agreed on.

In fact, one of the parties that had a representative at the talks who seemed to prefer a later independence was the Sultan of Johor, and by some accounts, some persuasion was needed for an acquiescence.

So where was Queen Elizabeth II in all this? As far as I can see, she wasn’t involved in the talks at all. She did not even attend the independence ceremony in Malaya, instead being represented by the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester.

Still, she was a strong symbol of the British Commonwealth, and did visit Malaysia three times, the last in conjunction with the 1998 Commonwealth Games. However, since then, it feels like her influence faded, and instead of being the spokesperson who worked to maintain good relations between the Commonwealth countries, she was instead seen as a remnant of a British empire that was best forgotten, even if she had no real part to play in British Foreign Office affairs.

Although Queen Elizabeth II didn’t have a direct role to play in granting Malaya’s independence, perhaps what we should take away is that the British Empire and its officials – for all their faults – played their own part in helping pave the road to independence in ways that were sometimes surprising, but ultimately expected.

Logic is the antithesis of emotion but mathematician-turned-scriptwriter dzof Azmi’s theory is that people need both to make sense of life’s vagaries and contradictions. Write to dzof at lifestyle@thestar.com.my. The views expressed here are entirely the writer’s own.

Although Queen elizabeth II didn’t have a direct role to play in granting malaysia’s independence, perhaps what we should take away is that the british empire and its officials – for all their faults – played their own part in helping pave the road to independence.