{"title":"“促成后殖民时期的马来西亚:当地精英如何塑造科博尔德委员会,1961-63年”","authors":"David R. Saunders","doi":"10.1080/23337486.2023.2268958","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTSabah’s decolonization and subsequent merger with Malaysia was fraught with uncertainty. The 1962 Cobbold Commission of Enquiry in British Borneo aggravated regional tensions in Southeast Asia and sparked allegations of neo-colonialism. While Orthodox scholarship argues that the commission delivered a decisive cross-section of public opinion, fresh analysis of archival material indicates that its outcomes were compromised by logistical and functional limitations. Through recovering key local voices and disentangling commission addenda from the archive, this paper shows how the inquiry became a vehicle for local elite advancement and Anglo-Malayan geopolitical agenda, rather than transparent democratic legitimation. Furthermore, it contends that the pre-emptive (rather than post factum) nature of the inquiry laid bare its political potentiality. The inconclusiveness of its findings led many to dismiss Sabah’s public as incapable of determining its own future, prompting Britain and Malaya to push ahead with Projek Malaysia [the Malaysia plan] largely irrespective of public opinion. The subsequent push to form Malaysia contributed to deteriorating relations with neighbouring states and ushered a period of marked geopolitical instability. This paper argues, however, that a key, understudied outcome of the commission was the crystallization of local elite voices. Many elites—traditional headmen and local power brokers—claimed to speak for thousands of followers and thus utilized the commission to cement political influence in the postcolonial arena. By casting light on colonial political devices amidst the end of empire, this paper offers valuable nuance and a portable methodology for understanding a range of cognate decolonization experiences.KEYWORDS: Pre-emptive inquirylocal elitesdecolonizationcolonial commissionSabah Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).","PeriodicalId":37527,"journal":{"name":"Critical Military Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘Brokering a postcolonial Malaysia: how local elites shaped the Cobbold Commission, 1961–63’\",\"authors\":\"David R. Saunders\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23337486.2023.2268958\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACTSabah’s decolonization and subsequent merger with Malaysia was fraught with uncertainty. The 1962 Cobbold Commission of Enquiry in British Borneo aggravated regional tensions in Southeast Asia and sparked allegations of neo-colonialism. While Orthodox scholarship argues that the commission delivered a decisive cross-section of public opinion, fresh analysis of archival material indicates that its outcomes were compromised by logistical and functional limitations. Through recovering key local voices and disentangling commission addenda from the archive, this paper shows how the inquiry became a vehicle for local elite advancement and Anglo-Malayan geopolitical agenda, rather than transparent democratic legitimation. Furthermore, it contends that the pre-emptive (rather than post factum) nature of the inquiry laid bare its political potentiality. The inconclusiveness of its findings led many to dismiss Sabah’s public as incapable of determining its own future, prompting Britain and Malaya to push ahead with Projek Malaysia [the Malaysia plan] largely irrespective of public opinion. The subsequent push to form Malaysia contributed to deteriorating relations with neighbouring states and ushered a period of marked geopolitical instability. This paper argues, however, that a key, understudied outcome of the commission was the crystallization of local elite voices. Many elites—traditional headmen and local power brokers—claimed to speak for thousands of followers and thus utilized the commission to cement political influence in the postcolonial arena. By casting light on colonial political devices amidst the end of empire, this paper offers valuable nuance and a portable methodology for understanding a range of cognate decolonization experiences.KEYWORDS: Pre-emptive inquirylocal elitesdecolonizationcolonial commissionSabah Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).\",\"PeriodicalId\":37527,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Military Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Military Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/23337486.2023.2268958\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Military Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23337486.2023.2268958","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
‘Brokering a postcolonial Malaysia: how local elites shaped the Cobbold Commission, 1961–63’
ABSTRACTSabah’s decolonization and subsequent merger with Malaysia was fraught with uncertainty. The 1962 Cobbold Commission of Enquiry in British Borneo aggravated regional tensions in Southeast Asia and sparked allegations of neo-colonialism. While Orthodox scholarship argues that the commission delivered a decisive cross-section of public opinion, fresh analysis of archival material indicates that its outcomes were compromised by logistical and functional limitations. Through recovering key local voices and disentangling commission addenda from the archive, this paper shows how the inquiry became a vehicle for local elite advancement and Anglo-Malayan geopolitical agenda, rather than transparent democratic legitimation. Furthermore, it contends that the pre-emptive (rather than post factum) nature of the inquiry laid bare its political potentiality. The inconclusiveness of its findings led many to dismiss Sabah’s public as incapable of determining its own future, prompting Britain and Malaya to push ahead with Projek Malaysia [the Malaysia plan] largely irrespective of public opinion. The subsequent push to form Malaysia contributed to deteriorating relations with neighbouring states and ushered a period of marked geopolitical instability. This paper argues, however, that a key, understudied outcome of the commission was the crystallization of local elite voices. Many elites—traditional headmen and local power brokers—claimed to speak for thousands of followers and thus utilized the commission to cement political influence in the postcolonial arena. By casting light on colonial political devices amidst the end of empire, this paper offers valuable nuance and a portable methodology for understanding a range of cognate decolonization experiences.KEYWORDS: Pre-emptive inquirylocal elitesdecolonizationcolonial commissionSabah Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
期刊介绍:
Critical Military Studies provides a rigorous, innovative platform for interdisciplinary debate on the operation of military power. It encourages the interrogation and destabilization of often taken-for-granted categories related to the military, militarism and militarization. It especially welcomes original thinking on contradictions and tensions central to the ways in which military institutions and military power work, how such tensions are reproduced within different societies and geopolitical arenas, and within and beyond academic discourse. Contributions on experiences of militarization among groups and individuals, and in hitherto underexplored, perhaps even seemingly ‘non-military’ settings are also encouraged. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor, and, if found suitable for further consideration, to double-blind peer review by independent, anonymous expert referees. The Journal also includes a non-peer reviewed section, Encounters, showcasing multidisciplinary forms of critique such as film and photography, and engaging with policy debates and activism.