Govt fears amnesia as Battle for Merger goes for reprint

As the government machinery goes up a gear to promote the latest launch of Battle for Merger, maybe we should slow down and think why we have come to this juncture where the government frets that Singaporeans will one day forget our roots, and how historical debates are only the concern of a very very small group interested persons.

Yes, materialism is one main reason because of how our small island state has been tuned to survive through economic relevance in the global markets. Another reason is really because the education system has been giving local history a stale treatment, explaining how each stage of  historical socio-economic development was lacking until PAP came along. I am sure all A level history students can attest how histories of China, India and modern Europe was much more interesting than local history.

The last reason, which could be also the most damning, is that Singaporeans simply can't be bothered to learn their own history, and easily accepts what is presented to them. PAP supporters would want to believe that the communist threat was so violent that it was only through Lee's grace that extermination of the communists was not carried out. Conversely, many in the opposition chuckle at the "communist conspiracy" and take the view LKY was merely using the ISA to jail the opposition. If only historical truth was this simple duality...

The Battle for Merger was actually a series of 12 radio talks given by Mr LKY in 1961 in English, Malay and Mandarin. He argued that the Malayan Communist Party had used violence and sought to prevent the merger of Singapore with Malaya.

But if one is interested, especially those who read noveau interpretations of history and get all excited, they would find that the series of 12 radio talk that spoke on the dangers of the Communist Party of Malaya and the Communist United Front, were in fact all along available for listeners from the national archives websites, at no charge. They only needed your time and attention

But why should anyone read what this man has to say? Well, if one desires to get as close as possible to a historical truth, one should read and analyse from a variety of sources and not just depend on British, American or Communist sources to tell a version of events. Although I am quite sure some are just quite dismissive of Mr LKY because of what they went through under him rather than what they read of him. But surely it is important to read what he has to say if you want to understand the historical circumstances of Singapore, because LKY was one of the main actor.

And the main reason why you should read (but you may not agree) is the fact that after all has been said and done, an large majority of Singaporeans, at that time (in 59, 63 and 68) voted PAP/LKY into power, believed in their ideology and trusted the PAP with their livelihoods. You may argue that LKY won because he removed the opposition, but the same could be argued that if the support for opposition was so strong, they would have spoiled the votes, revolted and protested in the streets...but they did not. It passed its test of legitimacy although not with flying colours, some might argue.

A compelling point to remember when reading this book is - to argue his points, LKY, (in 1961, still not all-powerful as he would be in 1965), was very open about his personal encounters with British officials, the UMNO politicians, the Communists, the Leftists and even his own colleagues - and to date, there has been no noteworthy contestations to the version of events as he presented it.

For example, in The Battle for Merger, LKY shared a thereafter oft-quoted story where he met the PLEN, otherwise known as Fong Chong Pik, a powerful representative of the Communist Party of Malaya, in 1958. The PLEN was proposing that the PAP work together the CPM to form an anti-colonial united front. LKY was hesitant as the communists then were lending their support to David Marshall's Workers' Party. To verify that the PLEN was as powerful as he claimed, LKY asked the PLEN to prove his good faith by asking pro-Communist trade unionist Chang Yuen Tong to resign from the WP and City Council, so that David Marshall and WP can go on their own without communist support. Several weeks later, Chang Yuen Tong did just that. The PLEN had proven his credentials. And WP failed miserably in the 1959 elections.

Now, you might ask, how does that square with the latest assertions that trade unionists and politicians arrested during 1963 were not communists but merely leftists? Was Chang a lone wolf or just one of the many communist-inspired pawns that CPM could move? If so, who were those keeping their allegiances and associations secret?   

Another example, in 1959, after LKY secured the release of Lim Chin Siong, Devan Nair, Fong Swee Suan, Sidney Woodhull, James Puthucheary and Chan Chiaw Thor, (who were detained by the Labour Front and Brits for suspected communist activities), all except for Lim told to LKY that they not again let CPM make use of the PAP. They declared that if the CPM fought the PAP because of this, they would fight with the PAP against the CPM. To this end, they signed a declaration renouncing communism.    

So, if the assertion is that Lim Chin Siong was not communist, why did he not make the same gentleman's agreement like the rest of the above stated leftists? Another historical riddle rings up the register...

In conclusion, as we reaped what they have sown, as those who went before us slowly wither, as our genesis sometimes seemed more like a bad dream, I think it is ever so important for those who care about Singapore's history to pick up this book and read about the people, deeds and events of that era before coming to a conclusion. 

   

1956 Labour Govt White Paper on Singapore Chinese Middle Schools Students' Union

I came across an interesting Labour Front government White Paper dated 1956 on the issue of the Singapore Chinese Middle Schools Students’ Union (SCMSSU).

In brief, the SCMSSU (October 1955 – September 1956) was a mass student organisation for Chinese Middle School Students that participated in leftist and anti-colonial struggle against the unfair treatment of Chinese education. It was banned by the Labour Front government on 24 September 1956 over charges that it was a communist front organisation. Leftists and revisionist historians have challenged the government’s accusations of CPM subversion and claimed that the SCMSSU did not engage in political struggle. However, such revisionist accounts do not square entirely with documentary evidence.

The following is a commentary about the SCMSSU based on the White Paper and other sources. The original White Paper can be accessed here.

***************

In 1954, a delegation of over-aged Chinese Middle School students stood up to oppose the colonial government’s attempt to enforce conscription in Singapore. The students’ opposition to National Service culminated in riots when student demonstrators clashed with police on 13 May 1954 resulting in many injuries. This clash was followed by two years of student-led political action against the government. This same delegation of students eventually formed the SCMSSU with fiery student leader Soon Loh Boon as its president.

Even at this early stage, some of the leaders of this delegation may have been CPM members or subsequently became targets of cultivation for the CPM.

The following is a quote from a CPM directive dated 11 June 1956 (See White Paper, p.1):

“The work of winning over the school children is very important and must not be overlooked. Especially in circumstances where the enemy is stronger than we are, the work of winning support from school children and organising them to struggle is more important than military activities.”

According to historian CC Chin, in 1954, it was the CPM Students’ Committee leaders Huang Mingqiang and Chiam Chong Chian who put together a seven-member “National Service Task Force” to lead the student protests against conscription. This is supported by a statement made in 1955 by a Chinese Middle school student who was an SCMSSU leader and an undercover CPM agent (See White Paper, p.1):

“At one stage the Government was about to permit registration (of the Singapore Chinese Middle Schools Students’ Union) under the conditions that students should not take part in political activities or interfere with labour disputes. Representatives of the Preparatory Committee refused to accept this proviso and this was considered by the Party Organisation to be stupid … The Union should accept such conditions outwardly but carry on with political activities afterwards … The decision to register the Union with the proviso was undoubtedly made by the Party Organisation and accepted by the S.C.M.S.S.U.”

For more Chiam Chong Chian, read the earlier posts talking about his early life and how he organised the Anti-National Service Riots.

After its formal registration on 6 October 1955, the SCMSSU became involved in more anti-colonial activities with leftist organisations such as the Singapore Factory and Shop Workers’ Union led by pro-communist Lim Chin Siong, and the Singapore Women’s Federation led by CPM member Chen Mong Hock. Their struggles prompted the government to ban the SCMSSU on 24 September 1956, causing even more anger among the Chinese Middle School students.

In this context, the government issued the 1956 White Paper to justify the dissolution of the SCMSSU for being a “Communist Front Organisation”.

In his recent book “My Youth in Black and White” published in 2014, pro-communist leader and former ISA-detainee Lim Chin Joo (brother of Lim Chin Siong) dismisses communist involvement in the SCMSSU and argued that the CPM was not the leader or instigator of leftist student movements. He further claimed there was no conclusive proof that the SCMSSU was engaged in any leftist political activity.

Although the White Paper suffers from anti-communist bias, the facts of the White Paper clearly demonstrate that the SCMSSU was a prominent pro-CPM participant in the leftist and anti-colonial politics of that time.

According to the White Paper, although the government had registered the SCMSSU on condition that the students abstain from politics, the SCMSSU still managed to involve itself in leftist rallies, labour disputes and propaganda work to defend against any perceived threats to Chinese education, Chinese students and workers rights.

The White Paper also singled out the SCMSSU’s “Hsueh-Hsih” (Study) campaign as evidence of CPM influence. According to the White Paper, the term “Hsueh-Hsih” is derived from the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) slogan, which approximately means “Study for Action”. However, it is not clear whether the SCMSSU’s definition of “Hsueh-Hsih” was truly communist in nature. At the time, there were conflicting interpretations of the term even within the SCMSSU itself.

Regardless, the methods of the Hsueh-Hsih campaign as stated in the White Paper did offer the CPM an avenue to discreetly influence the students. By organising picnics, meetings and study groups outside of their parents’ and teachers’ supervision, the CPM could isolate the students’ from sources of reactionary influence. Interestingly, the White Paper stated that the SCMSSU had even adopted “Criticism and Self-Criticism” exercises to foster solidarity amongst the students. In these exercises, students would undergo a round of public criticism in front of their peers for errors in their ideology and personality. The White Paper claimed that such “criticism” exercises can trace their origins to the CCP’s indoctrination tactics and was allegedly used by the SCMSSU to pressure political opponents.

In its closing paragraphs, the White Paper also declared that the government had detained “several student members who have had Communist connections, one of them a Union official who produced copies of M.C.P. [Malayan Communist Party] secret and illegal publications on subversion”.

One of the arrested SCMSSU officials handed over documents explaining the CPM view that Hsueh Hsih “helps comrades to gather sufficient strength to meet the high tide of revolution” and defined Criticism and Self-Criticism as “the propelling power of the revolution”. There were also instructions to apply the lessons of the CCP’s victory in China to the “National Liberation movement in colonies and semi-colonies” (including Malaya). One of the arrested students was eventually convicted and sentenced to 5 years imprisonment for possessing these CPM materials (See White Paper, p.18).

All this lends credence to academics who have long acknowledged that the CPM had established an extensive network of communist and leftist sympathisers among the Chinese Middle School students.

Nevertheless, not all leftist student leaders were acting for the CPM. Indeed, CPM operations were aided by the growing anti-colonial sentiments of many Chinese school students. Had the communists been more patient and harvested the enthusiastic student and labour movement for a showdown at the ballot box, the history of Singapore would have been different. But what happened between the years 1954 and 1956 was that societal unrest, in part instigated by communists, gave the colonial authorities reasons to target what they saw as CPM front organisations and detain any CPM leaders involved. Such was the fate of the SCMSSU.

What did the Communists say about Operation Coldstore?

So it seems even former Permanent Secretaries, the highest of life form in the public service if you don't want to wear white on white, can't help but to wade into the historical debate. Over the weekend I saw this:

In case you didn't know who's Bilahari, he is none other than retired Permanent Secretary for Foreign Affairs, Bilahari Kausikan, who by the way gave one a kick-ass speech to the privileged boys at RI. But you wonder why was he talking about a TOC article that was already much talked about in Dec 2013? Maybe he missed out on the party back in Dec?  

Of course the former Permanent Secretary was not alone, and he was quickly rebutted by the rising star of local revisionist historian, Thum PJ:

Anyway, I have earlier written what I think about the current revisionist history here. Maybe both sides are trying too hard to prove the other wrong? One uses (extensively) records from the British Colonial offices and the other quotes history books written by what some may call sanctioned historians. Maybe one should get creative when official records are still held closely by the tightfisted Ministry of Home Affairs...

So what did the communists themselves have to say about Operation Coldstore and the Communist United Front? Has anyone researched the memoirs of former Communists operatives? For example, Chiam Chong Chian, a CPM cadre who was said to orchestrated the May 1954 Anti-National Service riot.

This is what Chin Peng, the former leader of Communist Party of Malaya wrote about Operation Coldstore and Communist United Front:

- Referring to the "numbers of people we controlled" in Singapore in 1959, Chin Peng wrote, "I can certainly say that most of the island's workers sympathized with the left-wing trade unions and members of these unions were well appreciated they were under the control of the CPM. (p.409).

- On plans to sabotage merger, Chin Peng, Siao Chang and Eu Chooi Yip had a discussion in Beijing in mid-1961. Chin Peng wrote: "Our Peking meeting also examined in the detail the Malaysia Plan that was being hatched between London and Kuala Lumpur. The three of us came to the conclusion that it would be in the best interest of our Party if we plotted to sabotage this. If we couldn't derail it, at least we might substantially delay its implementation." (p. 437) (This is in line with what the Plen and Lim Chin Siong did in Singapore to frustrate merger?)

- On Operation Coldstore, Chin Peng wrote that it "shattered our underground network throughout the island. Those who escaped the police net went into hiding. Many fled to Indonesia." (p.439) (The clearest admission by CPM that those arrested were CPM or CUF members?)

The leader of Communist Party of Malaya in Singapore, Fong Chong Pik, better known as The Plen, also wrote about Singapore's security situation from the mid 50s to 60s:

- The Plen wrote that at a secret meeting with other CPM leaders in Jakarta in 1957 (after the the 1954-1956 strikes, demonstrations and riots): "We were informed that the Central Committee took a positive view of the widespread development of the open mass movement in Singapore and sent its praises." (p.124) (That is, CPM approve of what their front men had been instigating in Singapore in the mid-50s.)

- The Plen wrote that the CPM "central leadership had decided to establish a working group...to directly and completely lead the struggle in Singapore" and that "both he [Eu Chooi Yip] and I had been appointed to the working group". (p. 122) (This reiterates CPM role behind the scenes in Singapore.)

- The Plan frankly revealed that he had used the Chinese press to delay merger. He wrote: "A lot of opinions expressed in the newspapers originated from me. These included slowing down the process of merger, and adopting the form of confederation." (p.161) (Wonder if revisionist historians can spot The Plen writing in the newspapers?)

- On his relationship with Lim Chin Siong, who was said to the CPM open front leader, the Plen wrote cryptically, "LIm Chin Siong and I did have a "definitely not normal association" and that Lim was a person "with whom I have had a special acquaintance." (pp. 170, 176-177)

  

All this debate and research is a good sign for the understanding of Singapore's history, especially the period of 50s and 60s where there has been a lack of neutral scholarly work. While some say that there was no communist conspiracy in Singapore's pre-independence political landscape, the memoirs of several communists leaders and operatives had indicated that they were active in the fight for independence of Singapore and against the LKY's idea of merger with Malaysia.

Maybe next year when Singapore celebrates our 50th birthday, the government would decide to declassify more information for scholars to discover, discuss and debate. 

Will the real exiles please stand up?

Who is an exile? What is an exile? Is an exile someone who cannot return to his/her country because he/she will face injustice? Is an exile someone who doesn't want to return because he/she does not want to answer charges levied against him/her? Is an exile someone who has completely no trust in the system and no faith that Singaporeans will stand up for him/her, if the cause is just? Is an exile someone who feels that freedom in a foreign land is better than being jailed at home? 

Then why do some stay and fight in Singapore even though they face many instances of unfairness and injustices? People like JBJ, Chiam See Tong and even Chee Soon Juan. They stayed and they fought the good fight. They brought democracy to our lands and they lend us a voice when we were deaf. 

**********

Let us look at the the circumstances of these three individuals featured in recently banned film To Singapore With Love. [And YES, Government was being dumb when they banned the film because it will only create more publicity. Perhaps they banned it out of their own stubbornness (and stupidity) to honour the fight against the Communists, but they have clearly miscalculated the political climate and the power of the internet.] 

HO JUAN THAI

HO made what were considered "Chinese Chauvinistic" speeches as a candidate for Bt Panjang during the 1976 General Elections. He was accused of working up racial tensions by accusing the PAP of "wiping out", "destruction" and "killing" Chinese language at the expense of promoting English language. 

When Ho was wanted by the Police for questioning regarding his inflammatory speeches, he decided to abscond to Malaysia and later London with the help of Tan Chay Wa. TCW was a Communist cadre who was later sentenced to death in Malaysia for possession of firearm. Tan Wah Piow, another exile featured in the film, also campaigned for Tan Chay Wa to be spared the gallows. 

Ho also publicly declared that he forged his passport to enter UK in July 1977 when his passport supposedly expired in Dec 1976. 

Ho had repeatedly claim that the Singapore authorities would not issue him a passport and that he would be detained unfairly if he returned to Singapore. The authorities repeatedly assert that they cannot give Ho a passport because he is being investigated for passport forgery but they will grant him one time pass to enter Singapore. They claim that he is wanted for questioning because of the inflammatory speeches that he made during the 1976 General Elections. 

Going by past cases faced by JBJ, Tang Liang Hong and Chee Soon Juan, Ho was most likely wanted for sedition or libel, and running away on a forged passport obviously didn't solve the problem. Clearly, Ho should answer some of these questions raised. If allowed to come back without any conditions, then any criminal who had escaped Singapore would be asking for the same thing. 

Excerpts of HJT's speeches

 

TAN WAH PIOW

This blog has written several posts about this leading leftist leader. You can read them here, here, here, here and here.

Briefly, TWP first hit the headlines in 1975 when he was jailed for a year for rioting at the Pioneer Industries Employee Union. TWP claimed that he was not present at the scene, but the state called upon various witnesses who thought otherwise. After serving his jail term, TWP was due to be enlisted for NS, but he decided to escape to Malaysia illegally and then to London subsequently. His reason for not serving? TWP said that he feared for his personal safety and he could be assassinated should he enlist. Then the natural question would be - wasn't being imprisoned just as dangerous?

One did not join the Communist club like they do the Tanah Merah Country Club today. Communists in the 60s and 70s did not carry a card to say that they were members. The state has always argued that TWP was a communist and he's being wanted by the ISD for questioning. I guess they can only prove this by communications intercepts and by association. The same could apply for persons detained under ISA today for violent political Islam. 

Associations were what TWP had. After serving his jail term, TWP was said to have skipped town with the help of communist operatives. 3 of those who helped him eventually joined the Communist Party of Malaya. TWP hid in Malaysia for a month before forging his exit permit, moving to Thailand, Amsterdam and finally settled in London. In London, he was aided by Malcolm Caldwell, another well-known British communist who died in Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge. 

In June 1974, when 30 members of the Malaysian National Liberation Front, a CPM proxy, were arrested, TWP led the protests asking for their release. In 1982, when CPM cadre Tan Chay Wa was being sent to the gallows, TWP campaigned for his case in London. In fact, many of TWP's close comrades, such as Juliet Chin and Chia Yong Tai, during the 70s eventually joined the violent armed communist struggle.  

When the communist threat was over and defeat was apparent, five of TWP's communist colleagues, who were also his comrades during his days as student activist, managed to gain asylum in Europe with his help. 

Now, if you were Tan Wah Piow, having escaped NS and helped a whole bunch of communists, would you return to Singapore? 

ANG SWEE CHAI

This is actually the saddest case of the three presented here because Ang Swee Chai was never wanted by the authorities for any outstanding charges and she left the country legally to join her husband, Francis Khoo, in London. She was interrogated for 72 hours by the ISD, where she claim she was mistreated, and released without charges. That is to say, she choose not to return home and stayed with her husband who escaped Singapore while he was being investigated for being part of the Euro-Communists in early 1970s.

What makes this case even more poignant is that Ho Kwon Ping, who was investigated together with Francis Khoo, served a relatively short stint under the ISA, and went on to be the Chairman of Banyan Tree and the President of SMU.  

In fact, ASC did return to Singapore in 2011, to lay her husband's ashes to rest. When ASC returned, she was not harassed by the authorities but neither did she stay. She even spoke at the National University of Singapore Health Auditorium. So it's really interesting to see her yearn for home in the film, To Singapore With Love, yet knowing that she could easily make Singapore her home again in 2011. Or maybe it was simply more attractive to frame a dutiful wife as a political exile?

So these are some of the men of and women featured in the documentary film, To Singapore WIth Love. Are they exiled by choice or because they were choice-less? The jury is out. Will the real exiles please stand up. 

Note: All screen grabs are from NLB archives of old ST. 

Screen grab from Singapore Rebel blog

Screen grab from That We May Dream Again FB page, started by those arrested under Ops Spectrum.

     

The life of Comrade Yan Chiang Ding

The following is my translation of the life of communist operative Yan Chiang Ding who was arrested by the Lim Yew Hock government and during Operation Coldstore for his underground communist activities. The original article in Chinese can be accessed here. The website is a treasure trove for those interested in communist history of Singapore and Malaysia.

Briefly, Comrade Yan was involved in May 13 Student Movement, Hock Lee Bus Riots when he was a student at Chinese High. He was later arrested under Operation Coldstore in 1963. Yan was released after 11 years in detention and joined the armed communist insurrection in Malayan jungle shortly after. In 1979, at 38 years old, Yan was killed in a fire fight after being ambushed in the Selangor forested area.

***************

Comrade Yan Chiang Ding was born in Singapore in 1941 into a poor family. His parents were employed by foreigners.

At the age of 13, Yan took part in progressive student activities. In 1954, soon after he began his studies at the Chinese High School, he took part in the May 13 student movement, which opposed the National Service Ordinance passed by the British colonial government. 

When the Lim Yew Hock government attempted to change the Chinese school education system in 1955, Yan took part in student strikes and collective struggles in school to safeguard mother tongue education. On May 12 during the Hock Lee bus riots, he participated in activities to show support for the workers who went on strike. On 18 Sep 1956, the Lim Yew Hock government, under instruction from the colonial government, took action to suppress anti-colonial forces, arresting many anti-colonial patriots and shutting down numerous progressive unions and student groups such as the Singapore Factory and Shop Workers’ Union, Singapore Farmers’ Association and Singapore Chinese Middle School Students’ Union. People were discontented and this eventually resulted in large-scale strikes by students and workers in October that year. Yan played an active role in the student struggles and his performance was outstanding. In 1961, he was admitted to the Nanyang University (Nantah). During his varsity days, besides focusing on his course of study, he also participated actively in academic research and social surveys. For example, in 1962, he played an active role in the opinion poll of residents in Tanjong Pagar and Kreta Ayer which showed that the people were against the merger between Singapore and the Federation of Malaya that was proposed by the colonial government and reactionary forces. Yan took on the work of educating the masses in his free time. Besides giving lessons on culture and knowledge to village dwellers, he also hosted talks on current affairs and often worked until late at night. He was well-liked by classmates and village dwellers as he was diligent in his studies, responsible in work and brave in struggles.

In 1955 when Yan was 14, he was detained for one week by the Lim Yew Hock government for safeguarding mother tongue education. However, he did not flinch and took greater strides towards the road of revolution.

On 2 Feb 1963, the Internal Security Council which comprised reactionary forces from the colonial government, Kuala Lumpur and Singapore launched Operation Coldstore to shut down progressive unions that oppose the merger and arrest union leaders and patriotic people. Yan was again detained.

Early that morning, agents from the Special Branch and policemen charged into Nantah to arrest the students. Yan remained calm and cleverly hid documents that could implicate his comrades while a search was conducted. Although he was eventually arrested, his composure and quick-wittedness ensured the safety of comrades and students.

Yan and other comrades went on several hunger strikes when imprisoned, with the longest one lasting more than 140 days. One day, in a bid to extract a “confession” from Yan and another political detainee who was a paid union secretary, the reactionary authorities brought them from Changi Prison to the Central Police Station and put them in solitary confinement. During that time, Yan and the comrade were stripped of the freedom to move around and read books and publications. They were also interrogated and tortured round the clock by Special Branch agents. To protest against the unreasonable suppression by the reactionary authorities, they went on a hunger strike and were prepared to sacrifice their life to expose the ruthless means of the reactionary authorities. When the reactionary authorities saw that they were in critical condition, they became afraid that the hunger strike would arouse public opinion and cause condemnation which could adversely affect the reputation of the reactionary rulers. In the end, they acceded to Yan and the comrade’s request and sent them back to Changi Prison.

During the hunger strike, Yan became unconscious on several occasions and almost lost his life. The reactionary authorities used all means, including threats and inducements to make Yan say things that were unfavourable to the people and write a “confession” against his belief. When Yan refused to do as told, he was given all kinds of torture, but that did not weaken his fighting spirit a bit. He reproduced articles from the Voice of Malayan Revolution and PRC radio stations and secretly circulated them among comrades who were detained. He remained firm and refused to accept the conditions for release put forward by the reactionary authorities.

After 11 long years in prison, Yan was released in early 1974. After his release, he continued to secretly engage in revolutionary propaganda and helped to raise funds for the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM). He told comrades firmly that he was ready to go to jail again. He said that going to jail was just a temporary loss of freedom and that the walls of a prison would never be able to stop a real revolutionary. He also said that being tortured was nothing and only weaklings would succumb to it.

Under the arrangement of the underground party organisation, Yan joined the Malayan National Liberation Front a year later in 1975. He was responsible for organising and publishing work in the beginning and later went on to head the group in Selangor.

In 1978, Yan fulfilled his long-time aspiration of joining the CPM. From then on, he set high standards for himself and devoted himself completely to revolutionary work. At the same time, the reactionary forces also tried to hunt him down. Later, the party organisation decided to deploy him to the troops for fear of his safety.

In May 1979, Yan joined the 6th Assault Squad to fight for the independence and liberation of the motherland. On Aug 7 that year, when passing by a forested area in Selangor, he was ambushed and killed by the enemy. He was only 38.

Whether he was working in the underground or deployed with the troops, Yan led a simple life and was a responsible and friendly person. He loved his comrades, he was decisive, had great fighting spirit, served the people wholeheartedly. He was loyal to the revolution and had profound hatred for the enemy.

Comrade Yan has left us, but his gentle smile and good character will always remain in our heart. The comrades have vowed to avenge him and fight the revolutionary war to the end!