Malaysian Indians - How they suffer

The ethnic tensions in Malaysia are mainly due to Sino-Malay rivalry and the role of the Indians was considered peripheral. But the Indian involvement this time -five of the six killed were Indians, the other was of Indonesian origin - is a sharp reminder that in Malaysia's progress towards prosperity, the Indians had been left behind. The Chinese are firmly entrenched in trade, commerce and industry; and the status of the Malays had been steadily improving due to the energetic drive of the Government since the New Economic Policy was launched in the early 1970s.

By all available indicators, the Indians are lagging behind. Compounding the tragic situation, many Indians in the urban areas are not only getting marginalised, but also lumpenised.

The Malaysian Indians, who number 1.8 million (8.0 per cent of the total population of 22.0 million), are not a homogenous group. They are divided on the basis of language, religion and place of origin. The overwhelming majority are Tamils 80.0 per cent; followed by North Indians, mainly Sikhs, 7.7 per cent; Malayalis 4.7 per cent; Telugus 3.4 per cent; Sri Lankan Tamils 2.7 per cent; Pakistanis, including Bangladeshis, 1.1 per cent, and the others 0.4 per cent.

As far as religion is concerned, Hindus number 81.2 per cent, Christians 8.4 per cent, Muslims 6.7 per cent, Sikhs 3.1 per cent, Buddhists 0.5 per cent and others 0.1 per cent.

These cultural differences, no doubt, are divisive factors; but, on the positive side, it must be pointed out, that over the years, they have developed an ``Indian identity'' over and above their primordial loyalties. The policy of the Malaysian Government to club them together as ``Indians'', both for political and administrative purposes, has further given a fillip to this process. Since 1955, when the inter-communal alliance came to power, the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC) had been the representative organisation of the Indians in the Government.

A notable feature of the Indian community had been its changing socio-economic profile. In 1970, 47 per cent of the Indians were engaged in agriculture, 74 per cent of whom were in the plantations. With rapid economic expansion and diversification of the economy, the plantations have been converted for other purposes, including construction of luxury homes.

The uprooted Indians were only paid a pittance as compensation; they naturally migrated to urban areas and joined the squatter population. A few years ago, Mr. Samy Velu, president of the Malaysian Indian Congress, deplored the plight of thousands of estate workers ``living in squalor in dozens of long-houses and squatter settlements all over Selangor''.

Aliran, monthly journal of the well-known Malaysian Reform Movement, have provided statistical details, which make disturbing reading. For example, 40 per cent of the serious crimes in Malaysia are committed by Indians; there are 38 Indian- based gangs with 1,500 active members; during the last three years, there had been 100 per cent increase in Indian gangsters; Indians record the highest number of those detained under Emergency Regulations and banished to Simpang Renggam Prison.

In the field of social woes, it is the same story. In Kuala Lumpur, 15 per cent of the squatters are Indians; they have the highest suicide rate; 41 per cent of the beggars and vagrants are Indians; 20 per cent of the child abusers are Indians and so also 14 per cent of juvenile delinquents.

Taking the ownership of national wealth, Indians are in the worst position. In 1970, Indians held only 1.0 per cent of the share capital in the limited companies, while the Chinese controlled 22.5 per cent; Malays 1.5 per cent and foreigners 60.7 per cent. At the turn of the century, Indians owned only 1.5 per cent, compared to 19.4 per cent for Malays and 38.5 per cent for Chinese.

This dismal position is directly related to poor educational attainments. The importance of education in a developing country need hardly be highlighted. It is a means for upward social and economic mobility; an avenue of modernisation, an instrument to enrich cultural life and, above all, in the Malaysian context, a means of national unity and integration.

Though the Malaysian Government has expanded educational facilities in a big way since the attainment of independence, the fruits of education have not yet percolated to the most disadvantaged sections of Indian population.

The Tamil medium primary schools are in a pathetic state. A single teacher handling multiple classes; ill-equipped schools, with many teachers having no commitment, and high drop- out rates are some of the drawbacks.

Family life is characterised by alcoholism, violence against women and addiction to television. They do not provide a congenial environment for education.

Finally, the question should be legitimately asked: to what extent has the MIC succeeded in its primary objective of safeguarding and promoting the interests of the Indian community? An Indian observer of the Malaysian scene comes to a dismal conclusion.

Factional struggle and disunity had been the major curse of the Indian community. Since its inception in 1946, fight for power, petty politicking and mudslinging had been the major attributes of the MIC. The rivalry between Devaser and Sambandan; Sambandan and Manickavasagam; Manickavasagam and Samy Velu and among Samy Velu, Padmanabhan and Subramaniam - it brings no laurels either to the MIC or to the Indian community. What is more, self-help measures initiated by Mr. Samy Velu to uplift the community, with lot of fanfare, have not led to desired results.

The Indian community in Malaysia is at the crossroads today. If the present situation is allowed to drift, it will do serious damage to the future of the community. If the present hardships are to be overcome, the Indian community must sink its differences and work as a team. The smallness of the Indian community and its present vulnerable position makes such a team effort all the more imperative.

The Malaysian Government must also consider the problems of the Indian community, especially in the estate sector and among the urban squatters, with greater sympathy and understanding. The Government should ensure that the Indians at least obtain a share equal to their proportion of population.

(The writer is former Director, Centre for South and Southeast Asian Studies, University of Madras.)