321

Savingram from Critchley to Canberra

Kuala Lumpur, 24 August 1965

40. Secret

Separation of Singapore

I refer to my telegram 1195 of the 16th August outlining the account given to me by Malaysian Ministers of the developments leading to Singapore’s separation.1

2. Mr Tan Siew Sin has checked up for me and tells me that Dr Goh Keng Swee first raised the disengagement when he came to Kuala Lumpur on July 15 (not the 13th as stated in my telegram). The later meeting was on July 20 and was not attended by Mr Tan Siew Sin.

3. Dato Dr Ismail has now told me that Dr Goh Keng Swee signed the Agreement on the evening of Thursday, 5th August, which is the day the Tunku returned to Kuala Lumpur. Inche Kadir, the Attorney-General, has also confirmed that the drafting of the Agreement was done by Mr Barker.

4. As I have already said, I find it impossible to believe that Mr Lee Kuan Yew was not fully informed of what was happening and in agreement with it. It is possible, but in my opinion unlikely, that Lee was playing a game of brinkmanship and did not believe that the Tunku would go through with a complete separation but would at the last minute accept something less that would suit Singapore.

5. In private talks with me, the Tunku had said he is convinced that Lee badly wanted the separation. In addition to wanting to be Prime Minister of an independent State, the Tunku believes Lee wanted to go one better than the Barisan Socialis who had been criticising Singapore’s merger with Malaya.

6. In public, the Tunku has shown no reluctance to take the full responsibility for the break and, as I have reported, he had certainly come to the decision that this was inevitable.

7. It could well be that Lee appealed to the Tunku to take the public responsibility and this would be characteristic of Lee, especially in difficult political situations. You may remember how in 1963 Lee sought Selkirk’s help in detaining the communists in Singapore but asked Selkirk to permit him to criticise the detentions in Parliament.2

[NAA: A1945, 248/10/17]

1 That is, cablegram 1795 (Document 315)—number incorrectly transmitted.

2 See footnote 14, Document 29.