Regaining Sabah to its rightful place

From the point of view of Malaysia, the Sabah issue has been finally resolved by the State of Sabah becoming independent and member of the federated states of Malaysia. But His Majesty, Sultan Ismail D. kiram of Sulu said that Sabah is still part and parcel of the sultanate of Sulu and any issue relative thereto should be resolved bilaterally if a bloody armed confrontation shall be avoided in the years to come. That is what he said in a letter he sent to then Prime Minister of Malaysia, Dr. Mahathir Mohammad, on November 14, 1999.

We lack information on whether or not the Sultan and the Prime Minister have any exchange of letter after that date. But it seems the Malaysian leadership is ignoring what the Sultan said in that so undiplomatic, albeit brotherly, epistle. At any rate, we feel there is a need on the part of Malaysia to look into the Sabah issue rather than have it relegated to the background to the chagrin and consternation of the ra’ayat of Sultan Kiram.

His Majesty, Sultan Ismail D. Kiram is a very religious and humble Muslim but quite different from his predecessor in his obsession for justice and peace on earth. But while patience and perseverance are still apparent in his person, we already discern unmistakable tendency on his part to look for other means, if peaceful ones, proved ineffective or futile in the course of his endeavor to bring back Sabah to the fold of the Sultanate of Sulu.

The fact that the Sultan and Kadatu-an, including the Royal Special Forces, have been secretly meeting to consider the Sabah agenda, whatever that means, should make us apprehensive, as we are now in fact apprehensive, of the Sultan’s moves relative to how Sabah might be regained to her rightful place, that is, the Sultanate of Sulu.

Talks have it that he had already sent several delegations to Indonesia and China for cultural purposes; now it is said that the Sultan is at the head of a delegation to the Netherlands or the united States of cultural or business purposes; his Majesty is even said to have shown schedules of some visits to some countries in the Middle East, for the same reasons. Anyhow, it may not be unreasonable to speculate that the Sabah issue might be brought out as a subject for extra discussion with the leaders of the host countries in the course of the visits.

The cession of Sabah to the Sultanate of Sulu is a fact established by history since 1704 which is now beyond dispute except to the colonizers or those who stand to benefit from the territorial expansion of Malaya. The lease of Sabah to Baron de Overbeck in 1877 is another indisputable historical fact known throughout the world.

In 1962, the late President Diosdado Macapagal of the Philippines had made known of the intention of the Philippine government to the Malaysian government though diplomatic channel to help the Sultan of Sulu to welcome the return of Sabah in 1978 on which date the lease term of Sabah should have expired after a period of one hundred (100) years. The Macapagal idea did not materialize because the Malaysian government had Sabah become a member of the Federation of Malaysia on the basis of Special Mission Report in 1963.

The late President Ferdinand Marcos, a legal luminary, knew what violence the unilateral and illegal act of the UN report did to the integrity and rights of the Sultanate of Sulu. He proposed to help the Sultan to recover his buccaneered territory but the Operation Merdeka undertaken for that purpose ended in the Corregidor fiasco in 1968. At any rate, Marcos had Sabah included as part of the Philippines at least in the constitutional definition of the Philippine territory in 1973.

There seems nothing brewing between the Sultan of Sulu and the Malaysian government if judged on the basis of the serenity of waters separating Sulu from Kuala Lumpur now. But some friends, who are aware of the Sultan’s moves relative to Sabah recovery, are saying that Sabah is a powder keg the ignition of which will surely disturb not only the Southeast Asian countries but some other countries of the world.

In view of the aforementioned notion and scenario, it may be in order to suggest that in the interest of justice and peace, the Kuala Lumpur government look seriously into the Sabah issue, find ways and means on how it may be resolved to the satisfaction of the parties concerned before anything cataclysmic, God forbids, may happen as a result of the Malaysian arrogance or scheme to relegate the matter to the background to the consternation of the Bangsamoro people. (Abubakar B. Mohammad, Maga Tawi)