No need to rush GE16, govt should complete term, says MP

No need to rush GE16, govt should complete term, says MP

Sunday, 02 Aug 2026 | 7:08 PM MYT





JOHOR BARU: The Madani government should not rush into holding the 16th General Election (GE16) but needs to focus on completing its current mandate to allow its policies to deliver results.

Pasir Gudang MP Hassan Abdul Karim said Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim should not hastily dissolve Parliament following PKR’s performance in several recent state elections.


Hassan said PKR should take time to assess the election results and reorganise its strategy ahead of GE16.

"Take a rest, PKR, after working hard during the campaign. We can then carefully plan a good strategy for GE16.


"Convince our leader Anwar Ibrahim not to act hastily. Encourage him to govern the country well until the full mandate ends,” he said on his Facebook page on Sunday (Aug 2).

Hassan said completing the government’s term until late 2027 or early 2028 would allow its economic policies to show results and give the people an opportunity to see their impact.

He said holding GE16 soon could be influenced by sentiments following PKR’s setbacks in Sabah, Johor and Negeri Sembilan, which could affect the party and Pakatan Harapan’s prospects.

He said the next 12 to 18 months should be used to strengthen the economy, attract more foreign direct investment (FDI), and boost public confidence in the government’s performance.

Hassan said Parliament’s dissolution could be considered once the people begin to feel the benefits of the government’s economic policies and see the economy moving in a stronger direction.

He reminded PKR members and supporters not to be discouraged by the recent election results, but to continue preparing for GE16.

"So, do not cry, PKR. You are a reform party. We are fighters. We are brave enough to fight, brave enough to win and brave enough to face defeat,” he said. — Bernama

Hassan Abdul Karim

9 hours ago

DON'T CRY PKR
Dunia Belum Kiamat

oleh Hassan Abdul Karim
Ahli Parlimen Pasir Gudang

...See more

143

36

8

A Parasite

From the FB page of: 

Anamuslim Waaftakher

Biggest political earthquake since 2018

Biggest political earthquake since 2018

By Joceline Tan

Sunday, 02 Aug 2026 | 2:21 PM MYT



THERE was a rather sentimental mood at DAP’s finale ceramah in downtown Seremban as supporters waved the torches on their phones in the air and sang along to a popular Chinese song, “Tomorrow will be better”.

But the next day ended badly for Pakatan Harapan, with some likening the outcome of the Negri Sembilan election to the biggest earthquake since 2018.


The tremors that emanated from the spectacular change of government has shaken the Madani government much more than the defeat in Johor.

No sitting Prime Minister has ever had to face this sort of setback, coming one after another and with another looming just next door in Melaka.


“It was an unforgettable night with many layers of messaging. Melaka could be another nightmare,” said newspaper columnist Jeff Ooi.

The Internet was choked with commentary over the fall of DAP secretary-general Anthony Loke and former Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Aminuddin Harun but the far more serious question is what has become of PKR, the party of the Prime Minister?

DAP has slipped from its pinnacle but PKR seems to be sliding down a slippery slope barely clinging on, be it in Sabah, Johor or Negri Sembilan.

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim was the driving force in all these state elections.

He has done almost everything within his powers to win over the Malays and yet they spurned his party.

He pulled a rabbit out of the hat when he released the findings of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Tabung Haji scandal. It was supposed to be a bomb that would blow up in Umno’s face but it failed to swing Malay votes to Pakatan.

Parti Amanah was supposed to get the Malay support but no one even bothers to talk about the party anymore.

Pakatan is in dire straits, it has hit rock bottom.

Loke, who is Transport Minister, looked devastated when conceding defeat to Barisan Nasional’s John Siow in Chennah. As the Chinese would say, they had chopped off the dragon’s head.

He secured about 75% of the votes in Titi Kong, the biggest Chinese new village in Chennah. In the good old days, he would have swept up 95% of the Chinese votes but his opponent is not only from the village but shares the same “Siow” surname with 70% of the villagers.

But it was the Malay votes that cost him the seat. The anti-DAP propaganda has sunk in with the Malays.

A Perak PKR leader said the government’s soft touch towards former Malaysia Anti-Corruption Commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki has undermined the Prime Minister’s war against corruption.

He said a news report claiming that Azam’s younger brother was awarded a multi-million ringgit contract from the Transport Ministry might have hurt the DAP leader among thinking Malays.

How is Loke going to face his party at the DAP congress on Aug 16?

Loke is a mature and moderate leader but the Malay dislike for DAP has unfortunately spilled over onto him. He was fundamental in building up DAP’s presence in Negri Sembilan where he was once a voice in the wilderness.

How will the DAP’s slide in support affect the thinking of delegations at the congress?

Surely they can no longer ignore the anger and sense of betrayal among the Chinese, especially the younger Chinese?

DAP has been the pillar holding up Pakatan yet is blamed when things go wrong.

DAP leaders had been confident that fear of PAS and Islam would lock in the Chinese vote.

“Young Chinese voters are not burdened by history. Young voters in the past used to think of the future of the community, of issues like Chinese education. Nowadays, they think about themselves,” said a Seremban lawyer.

Will they blame the Chinese anger on the Prime Minister’s overtures to the Malays?

DAP leaders only started to speak out more after the Sabah debacle but has that been enough for the party? As for the Malay DAP leaders, they are like flower pots in a Chinese living room with zero appeal among the Malays.

Will delegates save the party or save the Prime Minister?

The landscape has changed and DAP will have to think out of the box to survive.

Umno and PAS were previously like a blue and green wave competing to reach the shore.

But the blue and green wave has become a Malay tsunami.

The non-Malays may dislike Umno and distrust PAS.

“The wave is real and it’s flowing from the South China Sea to the Strait of Malacca,” said the above PKR leader.

Speculation is growing that Anwar is under pressure to call for an early general election.

Why should he? He can go on for as long as he still commands the numbers in Parliament.

Besides, Umno president Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamid has assured him several times that Umno will not pull out its support in Putrajaya.

It is unclear whether the cikgu still trusts his anak murid who has engineered two major wins for Barisan thus far.

The anak murid is on par with his cikgu as the ultimate political animal.

The Chinese have this saying that welcoming a tiger into the house is like inviting trouble. That might be the situation in the Madani government today.

The age of the political frenemy

The age of the political frenemy

By Philip Golingai

Sunday, 02 Aug 2026

Voting puzzle: Voters queuing to cast their ballots at a polling centre in Negri Sembilan yesterday. As the political map grows more fragmented and alliances and divisions shift, voters will need to adjust expectations. — Bernama


POLITICAL friend + political enemy = political frenemy. I define the term as a party/coalition that functions simultaneously as a partner and a rival, entering alliances out of strategic necessity when competing for power, seats, or influence.

In other words, what we are witnessing today is the rise of the frenemy: a political party or coalition that acts as a friendly partner on one stage, but turns into an outright rival the moment they step onto another.


Take the current dynamics between Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Harapan. At the Putrajaya level, their members sit side by side in the unity government, managing federal affairs and maintaining Cabinet discipline. But look at the state elections – in Johor or Negri Sembilan – and we can see how the gloves came right off. Ministers on the ceramah circuit had no problem criticising fellow ministers of another party who might sit next to him or her in Cabinet meetings.


Another clear example of the frenemy dynamic in action is the complex, ever-shifting relationship between Umno and PAS – a partnership governed purely by arithmetic, leverage, and mutual vulnerability. Oh, and of course, the ever-useful rallying cry of defending Malay rights.

Before 2018, Umno and PAS were fierce rivals fighting for the heart of the Malay-Muslim electorate, with Umno anchoring the federal government and PAS leading the opposition in its northern strongholds. They fought each other head-to-head in the 14th General Election (GE14) in 2018.

However, after the Sheraton Move infamously brought down the Pakatan administration in 2020, Umno and PAS suddenly found themselves sitting side by side in the same federal government under appointed prime minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin and later prime minister Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob.

That truce was short-lived.

By the time GE15 arrived in 2022, the alliance fractured over seat allocations and competing ambitions, leading both parties back to open warfare on the campaign trail. Fast forward to the post-GE15 landscape: Umno joined the federal unity government alongside Pakatan (which had defeated it in GE14), while PAS anchored the opposition bench under Perikatan Nasional.

Yet, even with that clear federal split, the frenemy dynamic refuses to stay in a neat box.

In the Johor state elections, PAS instructed its supporters to vote for Barisan in seats where PAS was not contesting, aiming to block Pakatan. In Negri Sembilan (where voting is ongoing as I write this), pragmatic calculations led to electoral pacts, with Barisan and Perikatan negotiating seat fights to avoid splitting the vote.

To the average voter watching from the sidelines, it can be deeply baffling. Are they pretending? Are they serious? Or are we just watching a high-stakes game of political theatre?

The truth is, when we use the word “enemy” in political discourse, it clouds our minds. To the rakyat, two politicians who tear each other apart on the campaign trail or in the august halls of Parliament ought to be sworn enemies. Yet, walk into the Parliament cafeteria during a break and you will see those same politicians sharing a table, having tea together, laughing.

Just as artificial hostility misleads the public, so too does assuming that current Cabinet partners are permanent allies. Much of the confusion on the ground stems from this ambiguity over what political alignments are actually meant to achieve.

In a podcast I recently hosted, Bersama co-founder and former Natural Resources and Environmental Sustainability minister Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad reflected on this very dilemma. Looking back, he noted that what Pakatan should have done from the very beginning was simply admit that its partnership with Umno is a one-term marriage of necessity rather than a permanent pact.

By failing to set those boundaries early, Pakatan and Barisan now find themselves entangled in a confusing array of arrangements on the ground. In state polls, Umno insists on testing its strength solo to satisfy its grassroots, knowing full well that once the ballots are counted, rivals must return to sit side by side in Cabinet meetings.

The relationship between PAS and Umno remains another volatile front. While some romanticise the idea of a unified Malay-Muslim bloc, Nik Nazmi noted that the two will always clash because they fight for the same voter base. The arithmetic speaks for itself: In GE15, Perikatan swept 71 seats while Umno was reduced to 26.

Right now, parties often align when they feel vulnerable. As Nik Nazmi observed of the Umno-PAS dynamic: “When one is weak, they will work together. But when one is strong ... one will stab the other in the back.”

That same dynamic of vulnerability is now playing out for PAS’ coalition partner, Bersatu. The party is trapped between an increasingly dominant PAS within Perikatan – where Bersatu has been relegated to stepchild status – and the ruling Pakatan coalition.

Bersatu, in fact, is facing what Nik Nazmi described as an existential crisis. Having never intended to stand on its own, it now finds itself squeezed in an overcrowded Malay political market, struggling to justify its relevance while its allies look elsewhere.

Coming full circle, I wouldn’t be surprised if Bersatu eventually ends up back in the Pakatan fold, having originally joined the coalition in 2017 to defeat Bari­­san in GE14. Alternatively, it may settle into the role of a spoiler, getting the Malay vote away from Perikatan and Barisan, much as we were seeing in early predictions in the Negri Sembilan polls.

As the political map grows more fragmented before GE16, voters will need to adjust their expectations. The lines between government and opposition, ally and opponent, will remain blurred.

If there is one cardinal rule to remember as we navigate this era of the political frenemy, it’s one of the oldest cliches in the handbook: In politics, there are no permanent friends, and no permanent enemies. There are only shared interests – and a whole lot of frenemies.

Beyond labels

Beyond labels

By Jahaberdeen M. Yunoos

Sunday, 02 Aug 2026

Nationality vs ethnicity: Chinese tourists taking a wefie outside the Penang Peranakan Mansion in Church Street, George Town. What people who aren’t from China may not realise is that China is also ethnically diverse, says the writer. — LIM BENG TATT/The Star


EVERY day, we casually refer to people as Chinese, Indian, Russian, American, Japanese or British. These labels roll off the tongue so naturally that we seldom stop to ask what they actually mean. For decades, I have been fascinated by how the careless use of words often leads to careless thinking. The distinction between nationality and ethnicity is one such example.

Yet hidden within this everyday language lies one of the most common misconceptions about human identity.

Many assume these labels describe ethnic groups. In reality, they often describe nationalities. The difference matters more than most people realise.


Nationality and ethnicity are related, but they are not the same. Nationality usually refers to legal or political membership of a country. Ethnicity, on the other hand, generally refers to a community connected by shared ancestry, language, culture, history, or traditions. One is primarily political; the other is primarily cultural and historical.

Confusing these two concepts may appear harmless, but it often leads to mistaken assumptions about history, identity, and even our understanding of nations themselves.

Take China, for example. We frequently speak of “the Chinese” as though they constitute one homogeneous people. Yet China officially recognises 56 ethnic groups. While the Han form the majority, there are also Tibetans, Uyghurs, Zhuang, Hui, Mongols, Miao, Yi, and many others, each possessing distinct languages, traditions, and histories.

The same is true of India. Outside the country, we simply speak of “Indians”. But India is home to an extraordinary diversity of peoples. Tamils, Punjabis, Bengalis, Gujaratis, Kashmiris, Nagas, Mizos, and many other communities maintain their own languages, customs, and cultural identities. In some cases, neighbouring communities may not even share a common mother tongue.

Russia provides another illustration. Although ethnic Russians form the majority, the country is home to Tatars, Chechens, Bashkirs, Yakuts, Buryats, and dozens of other ethnic communities. Likewise, the United Kingdom consists of English, Scottish, Welsh, and Irish identities alongside many other communities that have become part of modern British society.

Even the United States demonstrates the distinction clearly. “American” is not an ethnicity in the conventional sense. It is a nationality that embraces people whose ancestral roots stretch across every inhabited continent. Their shared citizenship does not erase their ethnic diversity.

These examples remind us that countries are rarely built upon a single ethnic foundation. Rather, they are political communities made up of numerous cultural and historical groups living under a common system of government.

The misconception arises because language often simplifies reality. Saying “the Chinese” or “the Indians” is convenient. It is useful shorthand. But shorthand should never be mistaken for precise description.

History itself teaches us why.

The borders of today’s countries are relatively recent when compared with the long history of human civilisation. Kingdoms rose and fell. Empires expanded and collapsed. Borders shifted through wars, treaties, migration, and political change. Yet the communities living within those borders often remained remarkably diverse.

Human societies have always been more complex than the neat categories we use to describe them.

Understanding this distinction also helps us appreciate the richness of civilisation itself. Diversity within nations is not an exception. It is the historical norm.

This misunderstanding, however, does not remain confined to geography. It sometimes shapes how people think about history, politics, and even religion. When nationality and ethnicity become blurred, some begin to imagine that modern nation-states exist exclusively for one particular ethnic community, as though political borders and ethnic identity have always been identical.

History tells a different story.

Modern states are largely products of evolving political arrangements. Ethnic communities, by contrast, often predate those states by centuries or even millennia. The two frequently overlap, but they are seldom identical.

Recognising this distinction does not diminish anyone’s attachment to their country or their heritage. On the contrary, it allows us to appreciate both more accurately. One may cherish one’s nationality while also valuing one’s ethnic traditions. The two identities can comfortably coexist without being confused.

Perhaps the deeper lesson is that identity itself is layered.

A person may belong to a nation, inherit a particular ethnic tradition, speak several languages, practise a religion, and embrace a modern civic identity simultaneously. None of these identities necessarily replaces the others.

In an increasingly interconnected world, simplistic labels are becoming even less adequate. Migration, intermarriage, and globalisation continue to enrich societies in ways that make rigid classifications ever more difficult.

Our language should reflect that complexity rather than obscure it.

Words shape the way we think. When we use national labels as though they describe single ethnic groups, we unintentionally oversimplify humanity itself. That simplification may seem trivial, but it influences how we discuss history, politics, identity, and our place in the world.

Words shape thought, and thought shapes society. If we wish to have more intelligent conversations about history, politics, identity, and even religion, we must first use our words with precision. The passport we carry identifies our nationality; it does not define our ethnicity. Understanding that simple distinction may help us understand the world – and one another – a little better.

Senior lawyer Datuk Seri Dr Jahaberdeen Mohamed Yunoos is the founder and chairman of Yayasan Rapera, an NGO that promotes community-based learning activities and compassionate thinking among Malaysians. The views expressed here are entirely his own.

PAS' pro-Islamist stance a double-edged sword

PAS' pro-Islamist stance a double-edged sword

By Wong Chun Wai

Sunday, 26 Jul 2026 | 5:42 PM MYT



PAS has frequently found itself at the centre of controversy because of statements made by some of its leaders, particularly on issues involving race, religion and gender.

The Islamist party strangely wonders why it is unable to win over non-Muslim voters when many find its stand on many issues unacceptable.


The party, which aspires to take over the country, is also fond of pointing out that the four states they govern – Kedah, Perlis, Terengganu and Kelantan – are exemplary states.

Unfortunately, most non-Muslims think otherwise, as these states remain poor and backward, in their eyes.


While the party often argues that its positions are rooted in Islamic principles or have been taken out of context, many of these remarks have generated significant public criticism and have affected perceptions of the party, especially among non-Muslims.

Some of the more prominent controversies included comments about non-Muslims and political leadership.

PAS president Tan Sri Abdul Hadi Awang has repeatedly argued that Muslims should lead the country and has criticised what he describes as excessive influence from non-Muslim political parties.

Some of his remarks have been interpreted as portraying non-Muslims as challenging the position of Islam or the Malay rulers, prompting accusations that the party alienates minorities.

Then, there is the use of religious terminology in politics. Various PAS leaders have been criticised for using terms such as kafir (non-believer/infidel) in political discourse or making statements that opponents say are divisive.

In recent years, even some PAS leaders acknowledged that such language could offend non-Muslims and urged members to be more sensitive.

PAS is still struggling with women and gender issues. PAS has faced criticism over statements about women's leadership, dress codes and gender roles.

One recent example involved a PAS Youth leader comparing women leaders to female cows, which drew widespread condemnation as sexist.

Last year, PAS Youth information Muhammad Salman Al Farisi reportedly posted an online analogy claiming that when a female cow leads a herd, she makes all the decisions while males just graze. He argued that humans should not follow a similar dynamic by letting women lead – which unfortunately was widely reported overseas.

Then, there are dress codes and moral policing. In PAS-governed states such as Terengganu and Kelantan, proposals or enforcement involving dress codes, entertainment restrictions, gender segregation and business regulations have often generated controversy.

Critics argue these measures affect non-Muslims and personal freedoms, while PAS maintains they are intended to preserve public morality.

PAS has also consistently opposed concerts and certain cultural events, arguing they encourage "hedonism" or conflict with Islamic values. These positions have led to debates over artistic freedom and tourism.

But the worst is its race based political messaging. PAS has frequently framed politics around protecting Malay-Muslim interests, arguing that Islam and Malay political power require safeguarding.

Supporters see this as defending constitutional provisions, while critics say such rhetoric deepens ethnic polarisation.

One recurring pattern noted by political observers is that PAS simultaneously seeks to expand support among non-Muslims through its non-Muslim supporters' wing while some leaders continue making remarks that many non-Muslims perceive as exclusionary or insensitive.

This has led to criticism that the party's outreach efforts are undermined by the rhetoric of certain members.

PAS, for its part, rejects claims that it is anti-non-Muslim and points to its non-Muslim wing and occasional non-Muslim election candidates as evidence that it welcomes all Malaysians.

overlooking the party's positions on governance, welfare, anti-corruption and economic issues.

The latest controversy involving Kedah Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Sanusi Md Nor is simply another case of a PAS leader shooting off his mouth and in the process shooting itself on the foot.

The PAS election director had sparked backlash after starting at a rally that "the Chinese have China, the Indians have India and the Malays only have Tanah Melayu".

Leaders across political lines criticised the remarks as racially divisive, while his party leaders have sought to carry out damage control by claiming he was quoted out of context, a tactical political approach which the media are used to.

PAS president Tan Sri Abdul Hadi Awang often rebuts criticism by making claims of Islamophobia when he is pinned to a corner and unable to explain convincingly.

Next month, Malaysia will be celebrating its 69th National Day and it is ironic that the country is still grappling with race and religious issues.

Voters should be picking their elected representatives on their capabilities and records – and not merely on race and religion, as advocated by PAS.

The misquote epidemic

The misquote epidemic

By Wong Chun Wai

Sunday, 02 Aug 2026

It’s not me, it’s AI: Politicians now have another entity to blame for their misguided statements: artificial intelligence. — Others


IT is something politicians have been doing for a long time, not just in Malaysia but around the world.

But thanks to social media, especially videos, they are no longer getting away with it. It is now easier to catch politicians who shoot their mouths off.

Many have a tendency to get carried away, especially when speaking to a huge audience. They just stop thinking straight.

In Malaysia, some politicians also seem to suffer from a mysterious condition that strikes only after a controversial statement has gone viral. Medical science has yet to classify it, but the symptoms are remarkably consistent.

First, they say something outrageous and bask in the cheering.

Then comes stage two, when social media explodes, followed by viral criticism.

Stage three: Declare, with a straight face, “I was misquoted”.

Blame the media, blame the critics for language inefficiency, and if it still doesn’t work, blame it on Islamophobia, if you are from a certain political party.

We have seen it with one politician. When he couldn’t stick to his “I was misquoted” defence, he proceeded to the next diagnosis: “I was quoted out of context”. However, as the video was crystal clear, he upgraded to: “It was a translation error.”

If the statement had been delivered in flawless English, Bahasa Malaysia, Mandarin, or Tamil, there is still one final line of defence: “My words have been manipulated.”

Because there is now another entity to blame: artificial intelligence (AI). One can always claim AI was used to manipulate the voice to create fake news.

It is a fascinating phenomenon. Malaysian politicians possess an almost supernatural ability to become “victims” of journalism the moment public opinion turns against them.

It’s a wonder how we journalists have managed to fill our news portals and newspapers when every controversial quote apparently exists only in an alternate universe.

Perhaps we have misunderstood the purpose of press conferences. We thought politicians were speaking to the media. Apparently, they were merely conducting experimental theatre.

Translation, it seems, has become the political equivalent of bad weather. Whenever things go wrong, blame the translator.

Then there is the familiar “out of context” defence. Context has become a magical place where every offensive remark somehow goes to camouflage itself.

Of course, journalists are not infallible. Genuine mistakes happen and indeed there are reporters who are poor in understanding other languages except the medium in which they work.

Quotes can occasionally be inaccurate, translations can genuinely miss nuances, and corrections are part of responsible journalism. But the interesting part is how rarely politicians discover these errors before the backlash begins.

Once upon a time, politicians could dispute a printed quote.

Today, there are livestreams, multiple camera angles, podcasts, TikTok clips, CCTV footage, and three different people recording on their phones from the front row.

Yet somehow, even high-definition video has quotes “taken out of context”.

The real casualty is public trust. When every uncomfortable remark is dismissed as a media conspiracy or translation error, genuine reporting becomes harder to defend, and genuine corrections become harder to believe.

Still, politicians get away with it most of the time. You have to be thick-skinned to be a politician.

Politicians ask voters to trust their promises, their manifestos, and their vision. That trust must also extend to owning their words when the microphones are on.

After all, leadership is not measured by never making mistakes. It is measured by having the courage to say, “Yes, I said it – and I was wrong”.

In my 40 years as a journalist, I have lost count of the number of times when politicians denied what they said.

But the most memorable one for me was a denial by a minister who has since retired. He called up my editor angrily to refute my story, saying he did not utter what I had written.

My editor, though, listened to the tape recording – that’s what we used in the 1980s – and then sent me over to the minister’s office where I replayed the tape to him.

After a short silence, he came out with this straight-faced reply: “You are still wrong. I may have said it but I didn’t mean it and you should have asked me to clarify.’’

What a gem.

But there’s a another new defence now: When all fails, start a new controversy.

Like one politician just did. He announced that his team had completed the legal and historical documentation to challenge Penang’s lease payment rates. The thing is, no specific physical “legal address’’ or court-filing location has been formally launched or executed yet.

National Journalism Laureate Datuk Seri Wong Chun Wai is the chairman of Bernama. The views expressed here are solely the writer’s own.

Where was the ancestral homeland of the Malays?

Where was the ancestral homeland of the Malays?

Ranjit Singh Malhi
Published: Aug 2, 2026 3:21 PM
Updated: 5:21 PM



COMMENT | There is a claim about Malay history that gets repeated so often, and so confidently, that almost nobody stops to check it: that Tanah Melayu - the Malay Peninsula – has always been the ancestral homeland of the Malays.

It is treated less as an argument than as common knowledge. A closer examination of the historical record, however, reveals a rather different picture.

To be clear, nobody disputes that the peninsula became the heart of Malay civilisation. This is where the great sultanates rose, where the Malay language reached its highest prestige, where Islam took deep root, and where Malay custom matured into one of Southeast Asia’s most enduring civilisations.

None of that is in question here.

What I want to ask is a narrower question: not where Malay civilisation reached its fullest expression, but where the Malays first emerged as a people at all.

These are two different questions, even though they tend to get collapsed into one - and the answer to the second, I would argue, is not found in modern political rhetoric. It is found in the evidence.


Tracing the origins

No single source can tell us where the Malays came from. Archaeology, linguistics, genetics and written records each capture a different slice of a very long story, but put together, they point broadly in the same direction.

Many scholars now accept that the ancestors of the Malays were part of a much larger Austronesian-speaking population that began expanding out of Taiwan roughly four thousand years ago.

Over the following centuries, these communities spread through the Philippines and into Island Southeast Asia, splitting into dozens of distinct societies with their own languages and cultures.

The Malays were one of the peoples that eventually emerged from this process.

It would be a mistake, though, to compress all this into the shorthand that “the Malays came from Taiwan”. That badly oversimplifies what was a slow, layered process of migration, mixing and state-building spanning thousands of years.

Taiwan


The Malays, as we would recognise them, did not exist yet when that expansion began - they took shape much later, inside Island Southeast Asia itself, through contact, adaptation and the gradual formation of states.

So where exactly did that happen? Several of the earliest written sources point to the same answer: southeast Sumatra, not the Malay Peninsula.

Chinese records from the 7th century mention a kingdom called Mo-lo-yu, or Malayu, in the Jambi region.

Centuries later, the Javanese court poet Mpu Prapanca, in his book titled “Desawarnana”, also located Melayu in Sumatra. Writing in the early 16th century, the Portuguese apothecary Tomé Pires associated Tanah Melayu with an area near Palembang.

What is striking here is not just what these sources say, but who is saying it.

A Chinese court chronicler, a Javanese poet and a Portuguese apothecary had nothing in common - different centuries, different civilisations, different reasons for writing. Yet they all locate the same region as the birthplace of Melayu.


What modern historians say?

Modern historians back this up. Leonard Andaya has argued that “Malay” originally referred to communities in southeast Sumatra, only later expanding to cover other Malay-speaking populations.

OW Wolters went further, describing the southeastern coast of Sumatra as the heartland of the early Malay seafaring world.

When four independent traditions - separated by centuries and by civilisation - line up this closely with each other and with modern scholarship, that is not a coincidence worth dismissing.

This should not really be controversial if you think about it. Peoples migrate. They build new centres of power.

They turn unfamiliar land into the heartland of a civilisation that had not previously existed there. The English did not originate in London. The Turks did not first emerge in Anatolia.

Recognising southeast Sumatra as the Malays’ earliest home does not take anything away from what they went on to build on the peninsula.

If anything, it explains it.


How the peninsula became Tanah Melayu

For more than 2,000 years, the Straits of Malacca connected the Indian Ocean to the South China Sea - one of the busiest sea lanes on earth.

Rather than dividing Sumatra from the peninsula, the straits bound them together. Traders crossed back and forth. So did scholars, religious teachers and ruling families.

Alliances were made, trade networks grew, and cultural habits moved freely between both shores long before Malacca ever existed.

Straits of Malacca


It was this constant traffic across the straits that eventually pulled the centre of gravity of Malay civilisation away from Sumatra and onto the peninsula.

The turning point came with the founding of the Malacca Sultanate around 1400. Its founder, Parameswara, was a prince from Palembang - in other words, from the old Sumatran heartland.

Artistic depiction of Parameswara


His crossing to the peninsula was not an isolated event; it was really just the most consequential instance of a movement that had been building for generations, as Malay rulers, traders and settlers kept crossing the straits in search of new opportunities.

Malacca had one enormous advantage: location. Ships from China, India, the Middle East and across the archipelago all converged there, turning it into more than a trading post – it became a hub of diplomacy, scholarship and religious exchange.

Malay became the language of regional trade. Islam embedded itself in the political and social life of the region. Malay ideas about kingship, law and court culture became the template that later sultanates across maritime Southeast Asia would copy.

It is fitting that Andaya calls Malacca the “standard-bearer” of Malay civilisation.

As Malacca’s influence grew, so did the meaning of the word “Melayu” itself. What had once described communities on the Sumatran coast gradually stretched to cover a much wider cultural and political identity.

Artefacts from the Malacca Sultanate era


By the early 1500s, the peninsula - not Sumatra - had become the centre of Malay political power, trade and culture.

That shift, not some original point of origin, is the real reason the peninsula came to be called Tanah Melayu.


What this means for Malay identity

This history also tells us something about what being “Malay” actually meant. Anthony Milner has made the point that “Malayness” was never just about bloodline.

Over centuries, it developed into something closer to a civilisational identity - built around language, Islam, loyalty to Malay rulers, and adherence to Malay custom.

Communities from Java, Minangkabau, the Bugis lands, Banjar and Aceh were gradually absorbed into this wider Malay world through assimilation.

Families of Arab, Indian and Chinese descent who adopted Islam, spoke Malay and lived by Malay custom were, in time, accepted as Malay too.

Malaysia’s Federal Constitution still reflects this. It defines a Malay by religion, language and custom - not by descent.


Why this matters?

Does any of this actually matter, beyond academic interest? I think it does – because our understanding of history should rest on evidence, not on inherited assumptions that nobody bothers to check.

Recognising southeast Sumatra as the Malays’ earliest home does not undermine the constitutional position of Malays today, nor does it diminish the peninsula’s central role in Malay history, or the achievements of the Malay sultanates and rulers.

Those belong to a different – later - chapter of the story, and there is no need to conflate the two.

If anything, the historical record makes the Malay story more impressive, not less. Starting from southeast Sumatra, the Malays built a civilisation whose reach went far beyond its original borders.

Their language became the lingua franca of maritime Southeast Asia. Their political traditions shaped one sultanate after another. Their literary, legal and cultural legacy is still felt across the region today.

History rarely stays still. It is not about fixed homelands or unchanging identities - it is about movement, adaptation and renewal. The Malays are a good example of exactly that.


Conclusion

So, was the Malay Peninsula the ancestral homeland of the Malays? The evidence does not really support that claim.

READ MORE: COMMENT | History, homeland, and who belongs in Malaysia


The earliest surviving written references to “Melayu”, together with the conclusions of leading historians, point instead to southeast Sumatra as the Malays’ original homeland.

It was only over the following centuries that the centre of Malay civilisation crossed the straits to the peninsula, where it eventually reached its fullest political, cultural and intellectual expression.

This is not just a technical correction. It is a reminder that peoples and civilisations rarely stay put in one place, frozen at one moment in time.

What makes the Malays remarkable is not a claim to some single, unbroken homeland - it is their ability to build, again and again, a civilisation that shaped the history of an entire region.

RANJIT SINGH MALHI is an independent historian who has written 19 books on Malaysian, Asian, and world history. He is highly committed to writing an inclusive and truthful history of Malaysia based upon authoritative sources.

***

It's noteworthy that Ranjit Singh has to reassure the Malays at regular intervals in his narrative that his presentation of historical facts "does not undermine the constitutional position of Malays" - how 'sensitive' he must have considered the bumiputera to be?

That aside, I trust Fei-Lo has taken note unless he prefers to remain blind, wakakaka.

PAS leader predicts BN-PN peninsula sweep, says alliance can win GE16

PAS leader predicts BN-PN peninsula sweep, says alliance can win GE16


Published: Aug 2, 2026 3:50 PM
Updated: 6:46 PM



BN and Perikatan Nasional’s continued alliance may eventually lead to the two coalitions establishing governments in every state in Peninsular Malaysia.

Taking to Facebook following BN-PN’s resounding victory at the Negeri Sembilan polls yesterday, PAS information chief Ahmad Fadhli Shaari said similar wins could be replicated if the two coalitions stick to their “winning formula”.

“If this BN-PN formula can be carried into the general election arena, every state in Peninsular Malaysia will be successfully captured, including Penang.

“Therefore, the PN and BN leadership should not look back anymore; continue with this winning formula,” the Pasir Mas MP said.

He added, however, that BN representatives in the federal administration should continue to serve in the federal coalition government with Pakatan Harapan as best as possible, while waiting for Parliament to be dissolved.

At yesterday’s polls, BN and PN managed to consolidate Malay votes and bag 25 seats for a two-thirds majority in the state, while Harapan was relegated to 11 seats.

PN’s seven seats were split between PAS, which secured four, and Parti Wawasan Negara, which won three. Umno secured 16 seats for BN, while MCA won the remaining two.

READ MORE: BN-PN 'Malay unity' wave coming, and Harapan is in danger

Bersatu, the PN component which was left out of the BN-PN alliance and had to fend for itself using its own flag, was completely wiped out.


Do not resist the inevitable

In a major upset for Harapan, former menteri besar Aminuddin Harun and DAP secretary-general Anthony Loke both failed to secure the Linggi and Chennah state seats, respectively.

Former Negeri Sembilan menteri besar Aminuddin Harun and DAP secretary-general Anthony Loke


BN leaders previously said that extending the coalition’s pact with PN beyond the Negeri Sembilan polls would have to be discussed before any decisions were made.

However, BN chairperson Ahmad Zahid Hamidi yesterday hinted that the agreement would continue to be in place during the Malacca election.

Commenting on the results, Fadhli urged Harapan supporters to reconsider their backing of the coalition at the 16th general election, arguing there is “no point supporting a team that is almost certain to lose”.

“Besides, if any Harapan MPs win (and become the opposition), they surely won’t ask for allocations from the government, just as they themselves didn’t give allocations to the opposition during this term.

“So, it’s better to support the winning team from the start,” Fadhli proposed.


‘Harapan should reflect’

In a message to Harapan leaders, he advised them to reflect on their mistakes instead of pinning the blame solely on their opponents.

“There’s a reason why the people rejected you today.

“Don’t blame us by painting it as if the people were fooled by racial sentiment. Do you think the people are not smart?” the lawmaker questioned.

Last night, Harapan election director Amirudin Shari attributed BN and PN’s Negeri Sembilan win to “extraordinary” levels of identity politics and communal rhetoric.

Amirudin, who is also the PKR vice-president and Selangor menteri besar, asserted that identity politics do not help efforts to develop the state or country.

Stressing that efforts should instead be focused on issues affecting the rakyat, such as the local economy and job opportunities, Amirudin claimed Harapan’s contenders had ignored such matters throughout their campaign.

Ukraine Unlikely to Produce U.S. Patriot Missiles as Technology Hurdles Remain High

Eastern Europe and Central Asia , Missile and Space

Military Watch Magazine Editorial Staff

August-2nd-2026

---

Launcher from MIM-104 Patriot System

United States President Donald Trump has cast doubt on whether the U.S. will allow Ukraine to manufacture missile interceptors from the MIM-104 Patriot system domestically, despite having earlier pledged to grant production licenses during the NATO Summit in July. Speaking in an interview published on July 30, Trump stated that he was "not sure" the United States should permit production of one of its most advanced missile defence systems in the Eastern European country, citing concerns over transferring sensitive military technology. The uncertainty comes as Ukraine and its European security partners continue pressing for greater access to Patriot interceptors following a sustained increase in Russian ballistic missile strikes. 

Surface-to-Air Missile Launch from Patriot System

Significant questions have been raised regarding the viability of producing highly complex Patriot interceptors in Ukraine, with industry officials and defence analysts having informed the British media outlet Reuters in July that the technical, industrial and security challenges involved meant production was far more likely to begin in Germany or another European NATO member, before eventually moving to Ukraine in peacetime. Sources cited by Reuters stressed that even with U.S. approval, production remains a highly complex undertaking, posing challenges even for much more stable and developed countries. 

Ukrainian Patriot System Milliseconds Before Destruction By Russian Iskander Ballistic Missile Strike

Patriot missiles contain sophisticated radar seekers, guidance electronics, rocket motors and advanced software that depend on tightly integrated international supply chains. Manufacturing many of these components requires specialised facilities that do not currently exist in Ukraine, while sensitive technologies would require separate export approvals beyond a general production licence. Boeing, which manufactures key components used in Patriot interceptor guidance systems, is unwilling to authorise production of some of the missile's most technologically sensitive elements outside the United States. According to reports citing industry sources, the principal obstacle concerns licensing production of missile seekers, which are among the most sophisticated components of the Patriot system. Without access to these technologies, any Ukrainian production line would remain heavily dependent on imported American components regardless of licensing agreements. 

Russian Iskander-M Ballistic Missile Launch - A Primary Target for Patriot Air Defences

Patriot interceptor production has struggled to keep pace with rapidly expanding operational requirements. Demand has increased simultaneously due to continuing supplies to Ukraine, the replenishment of U.S. stockpiles amid operations in the Middle East, and growing procurement by security partners across Europe and Asia. Reports from multiple Western sources confirmed on March 5, 2026, that the United States Army had expended over 800 interceptors from Patriot systems during just five days of engagements with Iranian forces. The result has been an increasingly strained production base despite major Pentagon investments intended to expand manufacturing capacity. 

PAC-3 MSE Launch from Patriot System

The Pentagon has sought to address these shortages through unprecedented procurement programs, with the U.S. Army having in July awarded Lockheed Martin a contract worth up to $58.6 billion to produce PAC-3 MSE interceptors for the systems. Shortages have been sufficiently severe that the United States was in March forced to request supplies of interceptors to replenish after extreme depletion of the Army’s arsenal in the war’s initial days, with the Polish arsenal being the only one in NATO that was not severely depleted. Poland rejected these requests, however, and instead sent interceptors from its stockpiles to Ukraine.

‘We still need him’: After Chennah loss, Loke receives backing from Chow, Negeri Sembilan DAP

Penang Chief Minister Chow Kon Yeow has urged DAP secretary-general Anthony Loke to reconsider his decision to step down as Negeri Sembilan DAP chairman. - Social media pic, August 2, 2026


‘We still need him’: After Chennah loss, Loke receives backing from Chow, Negeri Sembilan DAP


State committee says veteran leader’s track record has strengthened DAP’s position over the years


Keran Raj
Updated 57 seconds ago
2 August, 2026
3:48 PM MYT



KUALA LUMPUR – Penang Chief Minister Chow Kon Yeow has urged DAP secretary-general Anthony Loke to reconsider his decision to step down as Negeri Sembilan DAP chairman, as the state party committee expressed solidarity with its embattled leader following his defeat in the Chennah seat.

Loke, who had held Chennah for three consecutive terms since 2013, suffered a narrow loss to Barisan Nasional (BN) newcomer Siow Kong Choon (John) in the 16th Negeri Sembilan state election.

Unofficial results showed Loke securing 5,060 votes, while Siow received 5,593 votes, giving the BN candidate a majority of 533 votes.

Following the defeat, Loke said he would consider relinquishing his position as Negeri Sembilan DAP chairman and reassess his role within the party.

Speaking to reporters after officiating the George Town Festival 2026 at Padang Kota Lama in Penang, Chow said Loke should take some time before making any decision regarding his future in the state party leadership.

“He should cool down for a day or two before making a decision,” Chow said, as quoted by Buletin Mutiara.

“The party still needs him,” he added.

Chow described Chennah as one of the most challenging contests in the election, particularly following the new political cooperation between BN and Perikatan Nasional (PN).

“From the beginning of the campaign, we acknowledged that it would be a difficult contest because of the constituency’s racial composition and the new political configuration. The campaign also became heavily centred on racial and religious issues. Despite those circumstances, it was a very close fight,” he said.

Unofficial results showed BN winning 18 state seats while PN secured seven, allowing the BN-PN alliance to claim a two-thirds majority in the Negeri Sembilan Legislative Assembly and ending Pakatan Harapan’s (PH) administration in the state.

Meanwhile, Negeri Sembilan DAP has thrown its support behind Loke, urging him to remain as state party chairman despite the electoral setback.

In a statement posted on Facebook, Negeri Sembilan DAP secretary Cha Kee Chin said the party’s state committee had unanimously agreed to appeal for Loke to continue leading the chapter.

“The Negeri Sembilan DAP committee stands in solidarity and continues to support Loke Siew Fook as the Negeri Sembilan DAP chairman. We unanimously appeal for him to continue leading Negeri Sembilan DAP,” he said.

Cha said Loke’s leadership had been instrumental in strengthening DAP’s position in Negeri Sembilan and described it as the most successful period in the history of the state chapter.

“Starting with just two seats in 2004, Loke’s credible leadership has elevated Negeri Sembilan DAP to a position respected by both friends and opponents,” he said.

He acknowledged that the party was disappointed by its losses in Chennah and Repah but stressed that Loke should not be blamed for the outcome.

“The defeats in Chennah and Repah have certainly disappointed us, but they are not Loke’s fault, and he should not be held responsible for these defeats,” he said.

Cha added that with PH no longer commanding a majority in the state assembly, DAP would require Loke’s leadership to navigate future political challenges, including the 16th General Election.

He said the party’s initial assessment of the election results indicated that PH and DAP candidates continued to receive strong backing from their traditional supporters despite facing campaigns that focused on racial issues.

“Preliminary analysis of the state election results shows that Pakatan Harapan and DAP candidates still received strong support from our loyal supporters, despite facing opponents who played racial issues,” he said.

Cha said he had consulted all members of the Negeri Sembilan DAP committee, who unanimously agreed to urge Loke to remain as state party chairman.

Earlier, Loke said he was considering stepping down from the position after losing the Chennah state seat, adding that he would reassess his role within DAP before making any decision. – August 2, 2026