I REFER to "Important to understand the Malay world" (Letters, Jan 6) and continue to be perplexed by its implication. The writer states that the Malay rulers were "sovereign legally" but "political power was in the hands of the British" and "only they had the capacity and the power to raise a modern Malay army". Semantics aside, how is this at odds with my statement that the British Empire created the Malay Regiment?

If they did not want a Malay Regiment they would not have created it, no matter who asked. And if a Malay ruler sought to create an army independently, it would have been met with more than just "raised eyebrows". This is the reality of occupation. Remember before the British, the northern Malay states were paying tribute to Siam, with less onerous conditions than those imposed by the British.

The writer goes on to state that serving in foreign lands is the greatest contribution to serving the Empire. This is a gross misunderstanding of the history of British colonialism. The greatest contribution to the British Empire was contribution to the coffers of the Empire and ensuring that natural resources among other treasures were diverted "back home". Colonial armies, working with British troops ensured this by maintaining British order. These armies never had to leave their homeland to carry out this function. This is why the Malay Regiment had British commanding officers.

I have no idea how to respond to the writer’s contention that there is a monolithic Malay "society", "world" and "consciousness" with regards to the status of Singapore as a foreign land. I am amused that some Malays (today) still think of Singapore as part of the "Malay world" even though it was the Malay ruling class that twice in history lost this part of their "world".

The historical fact is that Singapore for whatever reasons was "legally" a foreign land or became one and Lt Adnan died on foreign soil. As an honorable soldier being led by his colonial superiors he would have served where needed much like non-Malay troops.

To clarify why I keep asking the difference between the roles played by Malay and non-Malay soldiers resisting occupation. This goes back to the idea raised by the writer of "In defence of the realm" that non-Malay resistance to Japanese Occupation should be considered as merely enforcing the imperialistic will of a foreign empire and Malays who resisted them should be considered as "freedom fighters". I don’t see much difference between the two since as I have repeatedly explained; they were both – Malay and non-Malay - servicing the needs of the British Empire. This is why I made reference to Malay and non-Malay resistance to British occupation, whom some would consider freedom fighters.

The writer makes an interesting point when he reminds us to understand the "historical bedrock". I wholeheartedly agree with this especially when it comes to the question of citizenship. We have to understand that non-Malay contribution to the history of Malaysia is not merely confined to the period of British occupation. It goes back centuries. When I make reference to non-Malays who were born here, I refer to a whole narrative that seems lost from our history books.

And if the study of Malaysian History is solely about the study of Malay states as the writer contends, I think the writer would be surprised to learn how much influence non-Malay cultures had on "the politics, economy and society of the Malay states. This is OUR history after all. Perhaps too he would cease to think of the "Malays" as some sort of monolithic entity.

I end this response (my final one to this discussion) in agreement with the writer. I agree that we should not manufacture another history to achieve political correctness. I believe that the people who wrote in were concerned that the history being taught to the younger generation was indeed being manufactured to fit with the current ethnocentric narrative to the exclusion of the rich diversity which was the reality. I end with a Polly Toynbee quote from The Guardian "Bogus history fuels present day national delusion". Sun2Surf