Kedah, Kelantan, Terengganu and Perlis used to belong to Thailand.
Sarawak used to belong to Brunei and Sabah to the Sultanate of Sulu.
Singapore used to belong to Johor.
If you had asked anyone in Semenanjung in the pre-Merdeka era about Sabah and Sarawak, most of them would probably have replied, “Sabah and what?”
Yangon and Phnom Penh — in Myanmar and Cambodia — are not only geographically closer to us than Kota Kinabalu, we are even linked to them by land. We share common words like kampung with the Cambodians, while the Burmese had at least some degree of historical influence on us — such as in the Kedah–Siam War of the 19th century — more than Sarawak or Sabah ever had prior to 1963.
While we now take for granted that Sarawak and Sabah are integral parts of Malaysia, this was not always true, even as recently as two, three, or four generations ago.
I bring up all these points to reflect upon the recent claim by Kedah that Penang actually belongs to it, and that the agreement separating Penang from Kedah — made by Francis Light in 1786 — was unlawful because it allegedly lacked the official approval of the British government.
If you look into the details of the claim and ask whether Penang “rightfully” belongs to Kedah, the conversation will almost certainly go nowhere, because at its core it requires us to answer a far more fundamental question: to whom does anything actually belong?
If we think there is some absolute principle that determines who owns what, the truth is: there isn’t.
There is no deeper metaphysical reason why Malaysia belongs to Malaysians, or Thailand to the Thais, or Kedah to the Kedahans, or Penang to the Penangites — other than the fact that the victors and the powers that be have decided that this is how it should be.
Even your house and car — why do you think they belong to you? Why can’t someone simply take them?
If your answer is that you paid for them, then understand that this “payment” is merely recorded on paper — and that paper has no value unless those in power uphold its meaning. It is because the authorities recognise and enforce that paper that, if I were to seize your house or car, you could report me — and I would be punished.
Without power, protection, or enforcement, that “ownership document” is not worth the paper it is printed on.
If you disagree, ask a Palestinian in Gaza whose property was seized by settlers, or the Ukrainians whose territory — a fifth of their country — was taken by Russia, what meaning “ownership contracts” carry when there is no power behind them.
At the end of the day, the military maxim “you own only what you can defend” is likely the most honest definition of ownership in this world.
If you ask why Malaysia belongs to Malaysians today and not the British Empire, once you cut through the flowery narrative, the answer is simple: the British could no longer defend their ownership, and Malaysians had become strong enough to contest it. Everything else is detail.
Likewise, if you ask how Francis Light could take Penang without the consent of the Sultan of Kedah, the short answer is: because he could — because Kedah could no longer defend its claim. When Light could no longer defend Penang, the British Empire took it. When Britain could no longer defend it, Malaysia took it.
And so, if the question today is whether Kedah can reclaim Penang, the real answer ultimately depends on whether Kedah can take it — and whether the Federal Government of Malaysia is willing to cede it.
Personally, I am quite certain the federal government has no appetite to surrender Penang to Kedah — not least because the two governments are ruled by competing political coalitions.
So if Penang is not going to be ceded to Kedah anytime soon, then why raise the issue at all?
In my view, the real answer is simple: money and elections.
Penang currently pays RM10 million annually to Kedah as an honorarium linked to the historical arrangement of separation, and the Kedah government likely wants it increased tenfold to RM100 million. Kedah has also repeatedly demanded payment for Penang’s water extraction from the Muda River, claiming it is owed compensation.
And so, the political theatre begins.
Earlier this week, Kedah Menteri Besar Muhammad Sanusi Md Nor once again revived the claim that Penang belongs to Kedah, and said Kedah was in the process of appointing a legal team to pursue the matter. In response, Penang Chief Minister Chow Kon Yeow simply replied: “See you in court.”
Chow noted that despite Sanusi repeatedly making this claim for the past three years, Penang has never received any formal legal notice from Kedah. He reiterated that Penang’s legal advisers are ready should such a notice ever arrive.
Penang DAP, meanwhile, issued its own response, pointing out that Penang’s status as a Malaysian state is clearly affirmed in the Federal Constitution and is not open to dispute.
Penang DAP chairman Steven Sim urged Kedah and PAS to focus on governance and the welfare of their people rather than repeatedly stoking a political provocation. PAS leaders in Penang, however, welcomed attempts to resolve the issue “through legal means,” saying that a court process would “reveal historical truths distorted by colonial powers.”
To me, this entire saga is unlikely to end with Kedah gaining control of Penang. What it will do, however, is supply Kedah’s state government with a political weapon — one that can be wielded to frame the federal government as favouring the DAP-led Penang administration over the Malay-Muslim leadership in Kedah, thereby strengthening PAS’s narrative going into the next election.
This is, ultimately, the real game being played — not sovereignty, not historical justice, not constitutional interpretation, but something far older and more familiar: money, sentiment, and the perpetual machinery of politics.
TheRealNehruism (nehru.sathiamoorthy@gmail.com) is a content creator under the Newswav Creator programme, where you get to express yourself, be a citizen journalist, and at the same time monetize your content & reach millions of users on Newswav. Log in to creator.newswav.com and become a Newswav Creator now!
The User Content (as defined on Newswav Terms of Use) above including the views expressed and media (pictures, videos, citations etc) were submitted & posted by the author. Newswav is solely an aggregation platform that hosts the User Content. If you have any questions about the content, copyright or other issues of the work, please contact creator@newswav.com.
