Brother of Lim Chin Siong publishes his memoir

Another book to add to the reading list...

Ex-detainee's book recounts turbulent days

Brother of late leftist leader Lim Chin Siong was a student activist in 1950s

BY LEONG WENG KAM SENIOR WRITER

RETIRED lawyer Lim Chin Joo, 77, is launching his memoirs today, 47 years after he was released from detention for alleged pro-communist activities as a student activist and trade unionist back in the 1950s.

The book in Chinese, titled My Youth In Black And White, tells the story from his birth in Pontian, Johor, to his days as a student activist in Singapore at the former Chinese High School - now part of Hwa Chong Institution - and briefly as a trade unionist before his arrest.

The younger brother of the more prominent, late leftist trade unionist and politician Lim Chin Siong, he was locked up for nine years between 1957 and 1966, and studied law while in prison.

After his release, he joined the civil service before starting his law practice in 1973. He retired in 2002.

Now vice-president of the Ee Hoe Hean Club, a gentlemen's club for Chinese businessmen, Mr Lim has previously kept silent about his past.

For years, he turned down media queries until he agreed to be interviewed for Hwa Chong's 90th anniversary commemorative magazine in 2009. In it, he described briefly his involvement in the Chinese students' movement, his detention and life as a lawyer.

Two years ago, he gave a talk on his "three years in The Chinese High" to mark the May 13, 1954 incident in which Chinese middle school students clashed with riot police for the first time over the issue of conscription.

His 442-page book will be launched at the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry Building's auditorium today at 6.30pm. About 400 guests have been invited to attend.

He and his brother remain well known especially among older, Chinese-educated Singaporeans.
Mr Lim told The Straits Times that he decided to write his story after the Oral History Department tried to interview him some years ago. He said: "I stopped after only one interview because I realised I needed more time to think and reflect before coming up with my answers." Then he decided to write his memoirs instead.

Although he was an active student leader and trade unionist for only about two years, he said the events he witnessed were significant and worth retelling from his perspective, especially his involvement with the Singapore Chinese Middle School Students' Union and Singapore General Employees' Union, and his days in prison.

He also paid tribute to several other leftist student and political leaders, including his brother Chin Siong, the late Lim Hock Siew and Soon Loh Boon.

A section of the book includes material written by his brother. It contains Lim Chin Siong's handwritten answers to questions he had been posed for a radio interview in 1992 but which did not take place in the end (See story below).

Mr Lim said he spent $100,000 to publish his memoirs. Proceeds from sale of the book, priced at $28, will go to his alma mater Pei Chun High School in Pontian, Johor.

wengkam@sph.com.sg

What was Singapore like in the 1960s?

It's always interesting to read how foreign diplomats described Singapore in 1960s. Today there was an interesting newspaper article describing the Singapore Chinese culture sphere in the 1960s. And this was what the Russian diplomat, who was in Singapore to learn Chinese dialects, said:


Most of the population lived in dilapidated slums and on dingy boats, without a sewer system, among rats, cockroaches, mosquitos, and flies. Ethnic tensions were also heating up. In 1969, Malaysia was shaken to the core by clashes between the Malays and Chinese. The echo of these events was heard in Singapore.

We interned at Nanyang University, where young people received a classical Chinese education that shaped their ethical norms and political outlook. Many of them looked towards China, the land of their ancestors, where the Cultural Revolution was raging. Nanyang students secretly admired Mao Zedong and criticised Singapore's Government for "subjugating the labourers and licking the boots of the West".

Leftist sensibilities of the downtrodden in Singapore showed themselves prominently during a festival of Soviet cinema in March 1970. A huge crowd of people without tickets burst into the screening of Lenin In October. They, and many other viewers, cheered Lenin's every appearance on screen, and sympathised with the depiction of workers clashing with the police.





Read the rest of the article here:

BY EVGENIY BAZHANOV


SINGAPORE'S first prime minister Lee Kuan Yew became honorary doctor of the Diplomatic Academy under the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.


At the ceremony to mark this occasion, it was emphasised that Mr Lee was one of the most outstanding figures of the modern world. I had the chance to witness first-hand how, in a phenomenally short time, he turned Singapore from a Third World country into one of the world's most developed and prosperous states.


In the autumn of 1968, I was sent to Singapore to study Chinese dialects as part of a group of Soviet interns. The island immediately amazed me with its exoticism. But it was also obvious that it was drowning in problems.


Just three years earlier, Singapore was expelled from the Malaysian federation. Malaysia and nearby Indonesia viewed Singapore as "the fifth column" of Maoist China. They were not the only ones holding that view, either. In 1970, the former Soviet Unionnewspaper Pravda characterised Singapore as "the centre of Beijing's subversive activity in South-east Asia".


The economic situation was getting more and more stormy as well. The island had long based its prosperity on trading in raw materials from neighbouring states but they decided to get rid of its services as an intermediary. Singapore's foreign economic activities were in decline and national income growth was slowing down.


Most of the population lived in dilapidated slums and on dingy boats, without a sewer system, among rats, cockroaches, mosquitos, and flies. Ethnic tensions were also heating up. In 1969, Malaysia was shaken to the core by clashes between the Malays and Chinese. The echo of these events was heard in Singapore.


We interned at Nanyang University, where young people received a classical Chinese education that shaped their ethical norms and political outlook. Many of them looked towards China, the land of their ancestors, where the Cultural Revolution was raging. Nanyang students secretly admired Mao Zedong and criticised Singapore's Government for "subjugating the labourers and licking the boots of the West".


Leftist sensibilities of the downtrodden in Singapore showed themselves prominently during a festival of Soviet cinema in March 1970. A huge crowd of people without tickets burst into the screening of Lenin In October. They, and many other viewers, cheered Lenin's every appearance on screen, and sympathised with the depiction of workers clashing with the police.


In the spring of 1970, having finished my studies, I left Singapore, and got a chance to see it again only 20 years later. It was an entirely differently, shockingly ultra-modern Singapore. The downtown area was filled with skyscrapers. High-rise apartment blocks were everywhere. The residents had swimming pools, tennis courts and children's playgrounds at their disposal.


Squalid eateries became cosy, sparkling-clean restaurants. Flies and mosquitoes were nowhere to be found. And it was not just Singapore that had changed; its inhabitants had changed as well. They became proud and confident, no longer admiring foreigners who "stooped" to speak local languages or eat at a street stall.


In the 21st century, Singapore has solidified its place among the most developed countries of the world and is one of the largest global centres for finance, aviation, sea freight, and communications. What is the reason for the success? Naturally, it is the effective strategy that Mr Lee's government had adopted in mid-1960s.


His government emphasised integrating Singapore's economy into the global market, thus stimulating exports. Nowadays, special attention is paid to developing high-tech industries. To develop them, the Government made an effort to attract foreign capital. The authorities created for investors a climate more attractive than in other countries.


The next set of problems that Singapore successfully solved was supplying the economy with inexpensive, qualified labour. In the 1960s, the authorities established a tight control over the wage growth rate. The Government brought labour unions under control and prohibited strikes.


As a result, labourers worked in clean, well-lit workshops and safety regulations were observed everywhere. Whether it was supplying workers with food and accommodation, or formulating a vacation and pension scheme - it was done according to the highest standards.


Another component of Singapore's success is in maintaining its political stability. For this goal, the authorities used all means available. Seemingly, all the attributes of a democracy are present in the country but every Singaporean knows very well the boundaries of what is allowed. To fight corruption, the country uses severe methods, which results in almost a zero level of corruption in Singapore.


There is an opinion that in the domestic policies of the Singapore Government, two ancient Chinese traditions persist. The first is Legalism: controlling the population while relying on strict laws. The second is Confucianism: governance based on morals and justice.


In ancient China, the emperor had to serve as an example of virtuous behaviour for the people. Otherwise, he would lose the "mandate of heaven" to rule.


The Government maintains its mandate by ruling Singapore using economic mechanisms and political firmness. It also considers the task of educating people to have high spiritual qualities as its responsibility.


The writer is rector of the Diplomatic Academy under Russia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

This is translated from an article published in the June/July 2014 issue of the Russian language journal Echo Of The Planet.

Who orchestrated the Anti-National Service riot of May 1954

Last month, veteran historians CC Chin and Hong Lysa have published their reflections on the role of the Communist Party of Malaya in the events leading up to the National Service Riots of 1954. The battle between these two historians, who hold diametrically opposing views on the CPM’s role, is undoubtedly thought provoking.

According to Chin, the clandestine CPM student movement committee was responsible for leading the Singapore student protest on 13 May 1954 against conscription by the British colonial power. This protest was met with fierce opposition from the colonial government which eventually resulted in 10 students severely beaten up and 48 students arrested by the police. Chin proceeded to pinpoint one CPM cadre Chiam Chong Chian as the person-in-charge of organising the protest on 13 May 1954.

However, in her article on May 19, 2014, Hong rebutted and disagreed that the protest was masterminded and led by the CPM, questioning whether the CPM student movement committee was effective enough to lead the students. Hong argues that Chin’s assertions conveniently support the PAP’s exaggeration of the CPM’s strength which justifies the PAP’s subsequent arrests of suspected communists and sympathisers.

While Hong is entitled to her opinion on the facts of the 13 May protest, Hong’s suggestion that Chin had written his article to support a political position is quite harsh, even in academic circles. Speculation about an opponent’s political affiliations, unfortunately, does not lead to more historical inquiry.

Interestingly, Hong also concedes that historians need more research and recollections from the individuals involved to form a clearer picture of the event.

Recently in February 2014, one such volume of recollection essays by former CPM cadres has been published in Malaysia. The book “Chiam Chong Chian Memorial Collection” edited by Huo Shi and Ding Jing Lei aims to commemorate the life of Chiam, the CPM cadre in-charge of leading the 13 May protest.

Chiam was born in Kuantan, Pahang in 1931 and had come to Singapore to study at the Chinese High School in 1947, where he and many other classmates were recruited into the Anti-British League movement. On 31 May 1950, he evaded arrest by the police and went underground, eventually taking on official CPM work from 1952.

For more Chiam's background, read the earlier post here.

Chiam subsequently went on to incite and direct many of the mass protests in the 1950s, including the student protest on 13 May 1954.

CPM cadre Huo Shi recalled that Chiam had coordinated the 13 May protest by relaying the CPM leadership’s instructions through him to the various cadres organising the protest and other CPM front organisations.

Chiam also conveyed the leadership’s instructions to Huo Shi on the final conditions which would be used to negotiate with the colonial government for the resumption of classes. Huo Shi was operating partially in the open and was the point of contact for the Communist underground.

As a mark of his commitment to the Communist cause, Chiam even risked arrest by going down personally to observe the protest at Chung Cheng High School so as to formulate tactical strategies. Huo Shi wrote that Chiam was nearly arrested but he cleverly used his Malay language to avoid arrest.

Click on the picture to enlarge

Interestingly, Huo Shi related one incident which suggests that the CPM had come prepared to confront the colonial government and maximise political gain from any outbreak of violence.

Immediately after the 13 May 54 protest, Chiam had handed to Huo Shi 36 photographs of students being beaten by police at the scene of the protest to serve as proof of police brutality. These photos were subsequently reproduced by the Singapore Chinese Middle School Students Union and sold to students as keepsakes. The speed at which the photographs were developed and distributed in those days goes to show organised the Communist movement was.

Click on the picture to enlarge

Reading the accounts of these former CPM cadres, it is apparent that the CPM did have a tangible influence on the 13 May student protest. Why then do some individuals try to omit the CPM’s role in the protest?

It could be a result of the secrecy of the CPM’s underground operations, where the risk of arrest by the police forced CPM cadres to masquerade as student activists, thus giving others the impression that the 13 May protest was free from CPM influence.

Ultimately, perhaps one could better deal with this conundrum by remembering that all historical accounts are merely incomplete memories of the past. Some may recall the 13 May protest as a student-led phenomenon, with little knowledge of the political intrigue that went on behind the scenes. Others, like Chiam’s comrades, will remember the event as a time when the CPM struggled against the colonial government through the students, who responded resoundingly in their favour.

A portrait of the struggling life of Chiam Chong Chian

The following is a loose translation of the biography of Chiam Chong Chian, who was an underground CPM cadre leader in Malaya during the 1950s.

Born in Kuantan, Pahang, Malaya in 1931, Chiam Chong Chian was a Malayan son that died on PRC soil because of the tumultuous struggle for independence and the battle between nationalists and communism during the 1950s and 1960s.

Chiam was the third child in a Hainanese family of six children. His father came to Malaya at the end of the 19th century, first becoming a baker and later a plantation supervisor.

Chiam was only 11 or 12 when the Japanese invaded Malaya during WWII. During that time, Chiam followed his family to hide in jungle and began to lived off the land. He joined the adults in hunting, fishing and delivering supplies while entertainment was Chinese classic stories of the Three Kingdoms and Water Margin.

In 1946, after the war had ended, Chiam returned to school in Kuantan and a year later enrolled in Chinese High Singapore. Not only were Chiam's results good, he was also charismatic and well-liked by fellow students. He was surrounded by a group of close friends who would later become his comrades. Many of these friends would later end up as liaison officials (with overseas Chinese) in China after the Chinese Communists took power.

1950 was a watershed year for Chiam who was senior high year 2. There was a surge in anti-colonial sentiments and seniors like him began to infect the younger ones in Chinese High with the need for Malaya's independence.

As the waves of anti-colonialism continued unabated, authorities began the clamp down of student activism with the closing of Chinese High, shutting down of student organizations, arresting progressive teachers and students and the expulsion of 50 senior high school student activists with Chiam being one of them.

On May 31, 1950, when military police surrounded the school to arrest them, Chiam was hidden in the school canteen by student sympathizers and managed to escape the school. As the surrounding area of Chinese High were houses of wealthy residents who typically employed Hainanese as housekeepers, Chiam was able to escape the dragnet by seeking help from his kinsmen.

From then on, Chiam bade farewell to his student life and joined the communist underground to battle against the British colonial power and achieve independence for Malaya.

In 1951, Chiam returned to Kuantan to teach in a primary school. He was humble, well-liked and earned the respect of the students. On the side, Chiam continued to work for the Communist Party of Malaya and received instructions to carry out reporting and research for the party.

In 1952, Chiam began to be tasked by the party to carry out organization work and operations. As he was passionate, responsible and honest, he was trusted by the party and began to take on more responsibilities. Under Chiam's leadership, the political environment began to open up and progress was made with mobilization of the masses.

In the early 1960s, Lee Kuan Yew began to work in cahoots with the British colonial power to exterminate the communists. Chiam was forced under these circumstances to escape to Indonesia.

When in Indonesia, he faced immense difficulties as he was unfamiliar with the country and did not speak the language. The 30 Sep 1965 purging of the Communists, where tens of thousands of Indonesian Communists were killed by the Indonesian military, made his situation increasingly unbearable.

To exacerbate matters, Cultural Revolution erupted in China and Chiam was criticized for his previous actions. He was criticized for his wrongdoings, forced to apologized and ostracized from the party. But he was said to be steadfast and hung on to his beliefs, never betrayed his comrades even though he was exiled from the party and lead a precarious life.

The only consolation Chiam had was in the mid-1990s when CPM leader Chin Peng met Chiam in a Guangzhou hotel. Chin reverted previous criticisms of Chiam and reaffirmed Chiam's lifetime commitment to the Communist cause.

Chiam passed away on Apr 26, 1998, due to multiple illnesses. He was 68 years old.

38 Years on: Goh Lay Kuan The Red Ballerina

Browsing the Straits Times forum section yesterday, I was surprised to see a letter talking about Goh Lay Kuan and her arrest under the ISA in 1976, written by Lionel De Souza. Mr De Souza, a former policeman, is apparently someone close to the establishment; and one does wonder why the sudden need to bring up the fact that Goh, who is also wife of Kuo Pao Kun, joined a splinter group of the CPM and visited a communist training camp in 1975. 

 

 

It was only with careful reading of the recent ST interview of Goh Lay Kuan that one can conjecture the deeper meaning behind the letter. In that interview with Goh dated 3 May 2014, she said ISD was looking to detain those who had received communist military training and she was lucky that she didn't know how to draw a gun.

 

 

 

 

This was despite the fact that she had met a high ranking communist cadre named Sister Fong and together they made a trip to a communist guerrilla military camp in the Malaysia-Thailand border where Goh received instructions from Fong to recruit more members and raise funds.

Goh made another interesting claim during the recent ST interview. She said she "overturned" tables when she was being interviewed by ISD officers. I am not sure whether Goh meant it in the literal sense of the word, or was it figurative?

Nevertheless, after this supposedly valiant act, she submissively went on national TV to "confess" her role in the communist plot and also pinpoint others who were involved. It must be day and night to go from overturning tables to appearing meekly on TV; but alas only those who were there would really know the truth.

Moving to the larger picture, Goh was one of the 50 people arrested in that operation. These 50 were charged with being affiliated to a group trying to rekindle the cause of communist subversion and terrorism. The group was the Malayan National Liberation Front (MNLF), a violent splinter group of the Communist Party of Malaya. Items seized from this group include, field directives, photographs of communist guerillas training in Malaysia-Thailand border, cash, booby-trap paraphernalia, including detonators and sketches of military installations.

Earlier in June 1974, another ISD operation nabbed 31 members of the same group, MNLF, and seized one pistol, 42 bullets, one hand grenade, 16 detonators, 3 homemade bombs and 5 improvised detonators.

Historically speaking, there was no definitive answer to say Goh was guilty or not, because the group was arrested before they could carry out any real attacks. But, it would be injustice to history if a reader reads the ST interview at face value, without understanding the facts behind the event.