Share This

Showing posts with label Trade and business. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Trade and business. Show all posts

Sunday, 17 March 2013

Sabah's invaders from the Philippines only flog a dead horse!

EVEN though foreign insurgents make a historical claim to Sabah, the facts of history refute it.


AS Malaysian troops and police continue mopping-up operations to flush out straying remnants of the Lahad Datu standoff, partisans on both sides trade emotive claims and insults.

Analysts, meanwhile, weigh the terms in historical documents like “rent”, “lease” and “cession money” to determine Sabah’s actual status. But not only are these documents read differently in translation (English and Sulu), the terms are also interpreted differently.


It makes more sense to focus on the events and circumstances of history. The known facts reveal at least 16 reasons why the Filipino Sulu claim to Sabah is unwarranted and unworthy of consideration.

First, today’s Philippines as a modern nation state and a republic by definition abrogates a former sultanate whose territory it occupies and whose sovereignty it denies.

The Republic of the Philippines has no claim to Sabah of its own. The on-off claim, originating from Sulu sovereignty made by certain quarters, is only a private matter of some revisionist individuals.

The second reason is that the Sulu Sultanate no longer exists, since there was no provision even for a constitutional monarch. Any claim requires a claimant and the property/territory in question, whether anyone else has effective control and ownership over it.

If the claimant or the territory does not exist, the claim cannot stand. The insurgents and their leader Jamalul Kiram III are only pressing a notional claim, since they cannot represent a defunct entity.

Third, there is no agreed rightful heir to the last Sultan of Sulu, even if an heir were to press the claim. Jamalul’s claim to be that heir is disputed by nearly a dozen other hereditary “royal” personages.

Another reason for rejecting his claim to Sabah comes with denial of his claim to the throne: 10 other “heirs” had renounced all claim to Sabah in 2007. Nine did so in a signed statement, and Rodinood Julaspi Kiram II in a separate declaration.

It does not matter whether Jamalul was among the nine. If he was, he had unlawfully reneged on the signed agreement, and if he wasn’t, he is outnumbered and is challenged 10 ways.

Fifth, when Spain took over the Sulu Sultanate as part of the Philippines, it left North Borneo (Sabah) in British hands. Spain disrupted the Sultanate by removing 18-year-old Sultan Jamalul Kiram II in 1886, replacing him with a rival, only to “reappoint” him six years later.

Britain made North Borneo a protectorate in 1888. Under Spain, the Philippines and most of the Sulu Sultanate with it were going in one direction, while North Borneo and the British went in another.

Eventually, the sultanate was divested of political and administrative powers until it exercised authority only over religious matters. No effective, functioning sultanate existed any more.

Sixth, the death of Sultan Jamalul Kiram II in 1936 saw no successor, since he died childless. His younger brother and anointed successor, Mawalil Wasit, died the same year before he was crowned.

Thus ended the Royal House of Sulu’s lineage. After Spain passed the Philippines, including the territory of the former sultanate (excluding North Borneo) to the United States, the US officially abolished what remained of the sultanate in 1936.

Eighth, the British North Borneo Company also ceased payment to the sultanate that year, indicating that the business sector had considered the 1878 agreement voided. (Payment later resumed only after relatives of the deceased sultan brought the matter to court.)

Ninth, President Manuel L. Quezon of the (then) Commonwealth of the Philippines declared in 1936 that Jamalul Kiram II was the last Sultan of Sulu. To emphasise the point, Quezon said the Philippine government would no longer recognise a Sulu Sultanate.

Britain had been exercising increasing proprietary moves over North Borneo, earning two rebukes from the US (1906, 1920). Britain ignored those reminders and annexed North Borneo in 1946, turning it into a crown colony.

Whatever the moral issues there, it again spelled the end of any vestige of Sulu royalty. For London, it was a justifiable move since it had taken over all the legal obligations of North Borneo.

Tenth, there was no question later (in the 1960s) about Sabah having to obtain independence from Britain. This underlined the fact that Britain was the sole governing authority up to that point.

Then as Sabah’s independence and the Cobbold Commission’s findings led to the scheduled formation of Malaysia on Aug 31, 1963, agitation flared from the Philippines. The date was postponed to Sept 16, such that Sabah was an independent entity for 16 days, ending any remaining claim from an extinct sultanate or the Philippines as belonging to it.

Twelfth, the very act of freely becoming part of the Malaysian federation negated all further claims on the territory by foreign partisans. The new state of Malaysia in its present form is recognised in all international organisations, including the United Nations and Asean, of which the Philippines is also a member.

Although former President Marcos tried to retake Sabah in the 1960s, the claim was later abandoned. At the Second Asean Summit in Kuala Lumpur in 1977, Marcos declared that the Philippines was taking concrete steps to end the claim.

Later, as Marcos’ rule clearly became a dictatorship, he made Punjungan Kiram “interim sultan” for Sulu. But this candidate ran off to Sabah, preferring to be a Malaysian instead.

Marcos then “appointed” Punjungan’s son Jamalul Kiram III successor to a non-existent sultan. This instigator of Lahad Datu is not only a dubious candidate since he is not the son of a sultan, but his claim to authority comes from a discredited and ousted dictator of a republic.

Not least, when President Corazon Aquino’s post-Marcos government planned a new Philippine Constitution in 1987, Malaysia lobbied for wording to end the disturbing claim to Sabah for good.

This would replace “historical right or legal title” with “over which the government exercises sovereign jurisdiction” (i.e. the status quo), which was accepted after the third reading in Congress.

So for Philippine citizens to invade Sabah to lay claim to it clearly violates their country’s Constitution. President Benigno Aquino III’s prosecution of these criminals is fully in accordance with the law.

It is also said that no rightful Filipino claim to Sabah exists because as a country, it had not consistently engaged in the activities of a de facto power there. Not only that, there has also been no consistent Filipino claim to Sabah.

Behind The Headlines by BUNN NAGARA

Related posts:
Sulu history and the Chinese
The former Sulu Sultanate, a foreign problem in history that became Sabah's   
The Sultan of Sulu reclaims eastern Sabah, MNLF among invaders 
Stop paying quit rent to Sultan of Sulu, it’s time to close the chapter   
Filipinos’ Sulu militant group in Sabah must leave Malaysia today

Thursday, 14 March 2013

Sulu history and the Chinese

Did you know that the Sulu people could have been Chinese nationals 250 years ago?

Sulu political relations and cooperation with China dated back to the Yuan dynasty (1278-1368). The Sulu missions convinced the Chinese to view Sulu as an equal of Malacca.

Since only foreign countries tributary to the Chinese court were allowed to enter Chinese ports, many countries or principalities in Malaysia sent tribute. Among these was Sulu. Sulu appears in Chinese sources as early as the Yuan dynasty (1278-1368), and a lengthy account of a tributary mission in 1417 from Sulu to the celestial court is recorded in the Ming Annals. Book 325 of the "History of the Ming Dynasty (1368-1643) of China," as abstracted by Groeneveldt, speaks of the Kings (Sultans) of Sulu as attacking Puni (Borneo) in 1368.


Trade with Sulu rule, European powers and the Japanese brought about the massive amounts of silver. Beginning in 1405, Emperor Yong Lo entrusted his favored eunuch Chinese Muslim named Zheng He as the admiral for a gigantic new fleet of ships designated for international tributary missions.

China’s First National Historical Archive, located in the Forbidden City of Beijing, preserves a very significant document presented by the Sultan of Sulu to the Qing emperor in the 18th century.  Dated August 1743, it is Sultan Mohammed Amirudin’s appeal to Emperor Qian Long to include the territory and inhabitants of Sulu as part of China. The document was translated into the Chinese classic language.

Qing Shi Lu, the historical annals of the Qing Dynasty, recorded the event in 1754.  It said that Qian Long denied the sultan’s request, although he did it diplomatically.

Had the emperor granted the request, then the history of Sulu would have been rewritten. (Najeeb Saleeby records in A History of Sulu "[Sultan Amirudin’s], that "Amirudin’s name is foremost in the memory of the Sulus partly because of his able administration and partly [because] he is the grandfather of all the present principal datus of Sulus." Sulu occupies a unique role in Philippine history. The island is the primary spot where Islam began to propagate. When the Spanish conquistadors colonized the Philippine Islands in 1565, they failed to take over Sulu until 1876.

Sulu also had unique relations with China. It had a rich tributary relationship with China since the early 1400s. Most of us are familiar with the story of Sultan Paduka Batara, who died in 1417 in Dezhou, Shandong province, on his way home to Sulu. This was the sultan’s first tribute mission. His heirs were left in China and are now well into their 21st generation.

At present, the special royal tomb of the sultan, which has two gates, is a huge compound with a mosque and impressive stone statues of horses, lions, grooms, rams, generals, and tortoise. 

The Chinese government has proclaimed the tomb to be under the state protection in January 1988 for its valuable and symbolic recognition of friendship between the Philippines and China.   “The Chinese local and national governments have alloted Sultan Batara’s Shrine a total of  one billion Chinese yuan or equivalent to seven billion pesos for the development, rehabilitation, renovation and construction of new buildings of the Muslim villages of the descendants of  Sultan Batara. The project is on-going and expected to finish in two or three 3 years, Tawasil said after the trip.

What we are unfamiliar with are the two "mosts" that Sulu boasts. First, it has the longest tributary relationship with China. Second, it sent the most numerous missions to China.   In all, 16 tribute missions journeyed to China, covering two dynasties and spanning 346 years—from 1417 in the Ming Dynasty to 1763 in the Qing Dynasty.

Other islands had sent tribute missions much earlier, such as Butuan in 1003, but these were few and lasted only a short time. The Butuan missions ended in 1011. More often than not, tribute missions to China were discontinued when the places were colonized by the Spaniards. That Sulu was able to continue its relations with China apparently has something to do with its independence from the Spaniards.  It had been acting as a sovereign state.

From this detail, we can surmise that China had no territorial ambitions toward the Philippine Islands.  Imagine, the Sultan of Sulu had voluntarily offered his territory as well as its people to China, and yet China refused the offer. Compared with the Spaniards and Americans who waged war from tens of thousands of miles away in order to occupy and conquer the Philippines, China was such a good neighbor.

Unfortunately, this historical fact is not well known among Filipinos, even in academic and historical circles.  The close relationship between Sulu and China can also be gleaned from the 420 documents compiled in Volume 2 of The Philippines: A Collection of Archives on the Relations Between China and Southeast Asian Countries in the Qing Dynasty. Of these, 73 documents contain materials about Sulu.  

Descendants of Chinese migrants are still in Sulu citing the current governor of Sulu Abdusakur M. Tan, who has a Chinese bloodline.

In barter trading, it is between Tausugs, Chinese, and Malaysians.

“There are only two types of foreigners who went to Sulu who did not wage war against the Moros – it is the Chinese and the Arabs,” Loong said, adding that “the Chinese entered Sulu through business ventures.” (Aileen A. Alam)

Souces and references:  BO GON JUAN waltokon.org; Neldy JoloTubagbohol.com, Aileen Alam http://zabida.com.ph/news/artist-tawasil-visits-sulu-sultans-tomb-in-china.html#.UUFTyVfgLHe

Related posts:
The former Sulu Sultanate, a foreign problem in history that became Sabah's   
Sabah's invaders from the Philippines only flog a dead horse!
The Sultan of Sulu reclaims eastern Sabah, MNLF among invaders 
Stop paying quit rent to Sultan of Sulu, it’s time to close the chapter   
Filipinos’ Sulu militant group in Sabah must leave Malaysia today

Rightways