
Remembering sacrifices of forgotten war heroes
PETALING JAYA: While it is well known that Malaysia and Indonesia share a long and sometimes uneasy relationship, not many people are aware that lives were lost during the insurgency at the height of the Confrontation period in Malaysia's early post-independence years.
The Malaysian Armed Forces Chinese Veterans Association (Macva) said this episode remains a relatively underexplored part of the country's history, often downplayed or omitted by mainstream accounts.
The association added that had Indonesia's first president Sukarno remained in power, the Confrontation might have escalated further, posing serious challenges for a young Malaysia still establishing itself as a nation.
'Something happened in Indonesia, which was then under Sukarno's control. Then came a coup d'état. Sukarno was overthrown, and the entire regime collapsed.
'I believe God saved Malaysia. It was a critical time,' said Lt-Kol (Rtd) Dr Liew Ngoh Chin.
'When we talk about this part of history, you won't find it in academic books.
'In fact, many university historians aren't even aware of the incident,' said Liew, author of Memoirs – Malaya and Borneo at War (Memoirs 2)', published by Macva, during the book's launch at M Resort & Hotel Kuala Lumpur.
The book is a sequel to the association's first publication, Memoirs of the Malaysian Armed Forces Veterans (Memoirs 1), released in 2020. Both books document the experiences of armed forces personnel during some of the country's most challenging times.
Also present were Macva president Lt-Kol (Rtd) Wong Ah Jit, better known as A.J. Wong and his predecessor Kapt (Rtd) Datuk Lee Kwang Lock.
Lee said he hopes the publications will raise awareness among Malaysians, especially the younger generation, about the sacrifices made by armed forces veterans in defending the nation's sovereignty.
'These two books were produced to create awareness. Especially for the younger generation. Imagine if your generation isn't aware, what about future generations?
'If we don't publicise it, the public won't know or understand what we've been through, especially now that things are so peaceful,' he said.
Lee added that Macva also aims to highlight the contributions of non-Malay veterans, in a bid to encourage greater participation from non-Malays in the armed forces.
'I was in charge of the Recruit Training Centre in Johor from 2004 to 2007. Every intake, we would get 700 recruits. If I got one or two Chinese to join the Navy, it was a blessing. As for Indians, we had maybe three or four. Too few non-Malays are joining the armed forces. That's the sad part.
'There's nothing wrong with joining the army; we know, because we've lived that life. It's a good life. Not rich, but comfortable,' he added.
Wong expressed hope that historians would now take note of the events left out of the nation's official narrative, and that these stories may one day be included in history textbooks.
Sunday's Memoirs 2 book launch drew nearly a thousand attendees, including army veterans, their families and military enthusiasts.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Express
an hour ago
- Daily Express
‘They need a fighter': Dr Mahathir announces ‘big umbrella' committee to unite Malays
'They need a fighter': Dr Mahathir announces 'big umbrella' committee to unite Malays Kuala Lumpur: Former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad has reportedly announced the formation of an informal Malay committee, describing it as a 'big umbrella' to unify the Malay community. According to a report in Malaysiakini, Mahathir met with other political leaders in Putrajaya — including PN chairman Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, Bersatu deputy president Datuk Seri Hamzah Zainudin, and PAS deputy president Datuk Seri Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man — before making the announcement. Advertisement 'They (Malays) need fighters to champion their cause. Right now, they don't have a dedicated fighter,' he was quoted as saying 'We're not concerned with other problems, we just want to focus on one struggle — the struggle to save the Malays,' he reportedly added. SPONSORED CONTENT According to the report, Mahathir said that the Malays' problems could only be solved if Malays once again led the government. He reportedly added that the movement was open to all Malays, including Umno members, provided they supported the same cause.


New Straits Times
2 hours ago
- New Straits Times
'I'm living my best life now,' says KJ on joining Cabinet speculation
PUTRAJAYA: Khairy Jamaluddin today kept mum over speculation that he may join the Cabinet under Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's leadership. The former health minister and former Rembau member of parliament said he is currently enjoying life as a podcast host and radio presenter. "I'm enjoying a good life now. Why would I want to give this up?" he said when met by reporters at the launch of Tealive's 3-in-1 Instant Drink Powder at a shopping mall here today. Speculation surrounding the political future of the former Umno Youth chief arose following the resignation of Economy Minister Datuk Seri Rafizi Ramli and Natural Resources and Environmental Sustainability Minister Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad. Both Rafizi and Nik Nazmi submitted their resignations after failing to defend their posts during the PKR election last month. This triggered speculation suggesting that Khairy was expected to return as a minister. Khairy declined to comment when asked about former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad's call for Malays, including members of other parties, to join the Sekretariat Orang Melayu movement. "I'm not a member of Perikatan Nasional or Umno at the moment. It is best that I don't comment. Let's focus on today's launch," he said.


The Sun
4 hours ago
- The Sun
Shangri-La Dialogue Criticised for Bias, Limited Impact
NOTHNG new came out from the Shangri-La Dialogue held in Singapore recently. This comes as no surprise as the event, touted as a platform for bringing together defence ministers, heads of ministries and military leaders from Asia-Pacific states, has achieved little since its inception more than 20 years ago. Initiated by a think-tank and wannabe influencer in regional geopolitics with an Anglo-Saxon lens, its stated objective – 'to cultivate a sense of community among the most important policymakers in the defence and security community in the region' – appears more distant than ever. Countries alleged by the West as belligerent or disruptive to the Western-defined international order were either absent or appeared to dismiss the dialogue as a hollow spectacle. In reality, the much-hyped event has proven to be largely inconsequential in delivering positive security outcomes. International Institute for Strategic Studies Take, for example, the exclusion of North Korea shows the inability of the organisers to break free from the ideological partiality that has characterised its agenda and activities right from the beginning. Although South Korea has been a participant since the forum's inception, North Korea – regarded as an existential threat by the US and West from the outset – has been treated as if it counts for nothing in the region's security and geopolitical landscape. Today the staunchly independent nation – once nicknamed 'the hermit kingdom' – is a formidable power with its nuclear capabilities. Despite attempts by the US to deny North Korea its legitimate position in the international community, the fact is that the country is recognised globally. It holds membership in the United Nations, Non-Aligned Movement, Group of 77 and the Asean Regional Forum – the latter being an intergovernmental forum focused on security and stability in the Asia-Pacific region. The exclusionary policy applied to North Korea stands in stark contrast to the stated purpose of an open and impartial forum that brings together countries of the region. Surprisingly, the forum also includes countries from outside the region – such as Germany, France, Canada and the UK – that have little or no legitimate credentials in deliberating on the region's security issues. This exposes the partisan operations of the private company, the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), which is registered in the UK, as a charity but in reality is a profit-making enterprise and the main driver behind the dialogue event. Western media coverage As expected, Western media covering the dialogue have also focused on the presentations by the representatives of the US and its allies. In contrast, there has been little or no attention given to the perspectives of representatives and private sector voices from countries that are less or not aligned with American and Anglo-Saxon foreign policy. In his widely reported speech, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth – a former Fox News talk show host now hoping to retain his job after bungling on the Signal-leaked chat scandal involving a military operation against the Houthis in Yemen – initially paid effusive praise to President Donald Trump for 'restoring the warrior ethos' so that 'we (the US) remain the strongest and most lethal fighting force in the world'. He then claimed that 'we are not here to pressure other countries to embrace and adopt our politics or ideology; we are not here to preach to you about climate change or cultural issues; and we are not here to impose our will on you'. His unsurprising main submission highlighted by Western media was the singling out of China as the common enemy in Asia-Pacific and calling on countries to open their treasuries to invest more in the defence and security of the region. This crass salesmanship pitch duplicates the demand that the Trump administration has made to the European Union although there is no war being fought in the region to justify the alarmist call. The identification of China as the regional and increasingly global threat to peace by the US is nothing new. It continues a trend in global geopolitics following the shift in American policy responding to China's rapid socioeconomic development and increasing prominence on the regional and global stage. Beginning in 2017, when the US officially designated China as a 'long-term strategic competitor' in its national defence strategy, US policy has moved from the previous friendly and engagement-focused approach to an antagonistic one, framing the relationship as one of 'great power competition'. To take China down in this great power rivalry, the US has employed a multifront strategy involving demonisation of China on human rights, democracy and a host of other issues; restrictions on Chinese businesses; technology transfer sanctions and other forms of economic warfare; and including a trade war most recently. Building up military assets Exaggerating the threat from China to manipulate the foreign policy insecurities of countries in the region – while indirectly soliciting procurement for the armament manufacturers of the US and its allies that dominate military markets – Hegseth claimed that Beijing is 'preparing to potentially use military force to alter the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific, including building its capabilities to invade Taiwan' and is 'rehearsing for the real deal'. This latest instance of crying wolf over China's security actions and intentions – while reiterating the US commitment to peace, stability and prosperity in the region – has little support or resonance among non-aligned governments, who see the US through unblinkered eyes and are working on strategic autonomy. Most countries in the region are more likely to pinpoint the US, rather than China, as the source of regional tension and instability. It is unlikely that the pressure exerted by the US for regional countries to share the military burden in alliance with the US will improve the prospects for peace. On the contrary, it could prove to be a double-edged sword if it generates a more dangerous arms race. American policymakers should also bear in mind that countries now have the choice to buy Chinese military systems that are cheaper and equally or even more lethal than the ones that Hegseth boasted about in his presentation. Western and other analysts should realise that increases in the defence budgets of the region will not bring easy victories or peace for any side. Singapore's role in regional security building Perhaps this belated recognition can be a major focus for the 2026 dialogue event. For that to happen, the Singapore government, which serves as host and organiser, needs to get out of its sleeping partner status and assert control over the programme agenda and discussions which are far from neutral, open and candid or intended to help bridge divides as claimed by the event propaganda. Finally, the primary purpose of the dialogue, which has regressed into one deliberating on how to counter and contain China, should be balanced with one focusing on how Asia-Pacific countries, including Asean, should be dealing with the US – which under Trump's administration is more intent on asserting American hegemony and making the countries of the region more subservient. This and the inclusion of North Korea in the next forum will help bring some credibility to Singapore's claim to be a proactive (and hopefully honest) mediator facilitating discussions on balancing deterrence and diplomacy. Lim Teck Ghee's Another Take is aimed at demystifying social orthodoxy. Comments: letters@