I read with great sadness that a Malay NGO group rejected the proposal to have the Kampung Baru Cina in Selangor as a UNESCO heritage site.

I also read with even greater sadness that a professor at an institute supposedly for all ethnic groups in Malaysia to also reject the call by minister Nga Kor Ming to honor Kampung Baru Cina as a precious memorial for Malaysia.

In this article, I wish to remind Malaysians that all our ethnic heritage sites, whether they are from the Malays, Chinese, Indians, Kadazans, Dayaks, or Orang Asli are all sacred entities to the soul of Malaysia.

All of us should make up Malaysia or else none of us deserve to be called Malaysians.

All for one and one for all. If we do not have this character, then let us not have a country at all.

The Malay NGO rejected the minister’s proposal by insinuating that by doing so, the Chinese can now be one day considered as “bumiputera” as the Malays, and thus challenge the special position of the Malays.

Secondly, they complain that there are worthier sites of Malay heritage that should have been proposed to the UNESCO board.

The academic from a public university, however, declared that Kampung Baru Cina do not possess much “Chinese” character to be selected as a heritage site of cultural significance.

He, a Chinese Malaysian, felt that important heritage sites should not carry only the heritage of one race, but should be like Georgetown in Penang or Melaka where multiculturalism is the key to our nation’s ideology and history.

It is easy to argue against the Malay NGO group.

For their first concern, where does it say that the idea of an ethnic heritage is transferable politically or historically into another citizen identity?

Has this been done before? Has there been a race that was originally not a bumiputera and by some magic of their ownership of certain pieces of land made into a bumiputera?

As far as I know, only political expedience and manipulation are the tools of such conversion.

We can even make some Muslim preacher from India as a bumiputera if we want to. It’s just politics.

Next, the NGO wants Malay heritage sites to be considered, but the question is, where are they? Where is the research and proposal?

For the issues raised by the public university academic, I am inclined to agree with him in saying that Kampung Baru Cina do not have a strong Chinese traditional character.

What I disagree is that the site of Kampung Baru Cina is a political and historical site that memorializes a dark history of sacrifice, struggle and forbearance at the time of the real Emergency (not like the Muhyiddin Emergency).

It is about the history of the fight against communism using old people, children, women and the sick to resettle them away from guerrilla insurgence threatening Tanah Melayu.

I agree with the professor that the site does not have a strong Chinese characteristic, but to me, the site has a strong Malaysian characteristic because the Chinese saved Tanah Melayu from becoming a communist puppet.

So, like Laksamana Cheng Ho of the past that gave assurance of protection to Melaka against Siam, the Chinese of Tanah Melayu gave their sacrifice to their new birthplace far away from the Great Motherland, China.

So, Kampung Baru Cina ini bukan warisan Cina but a warisan Tanah Melayu and a warisan of the future nation called Malaysia.

We have all heard of the tragic incident of Bukit Kepong.

At the same time that Sir Harold Briggs was planning the resettlement of half a million Chinese and a few thousand Malays and Orang Asli in new villages, the communists led by both Malay and non-Malay guerrillas launched a lethal attack on the police station at Bukit Kepong.

The incident not only saw many Malay police constables dying for Tanah Melayu and the future of Malaysia but also their wives and children.

Is this the heritage of Melayu as pejuang and perwira kaum Melayu for Tanah Melayu only?

No. Bukit Kepong is our history, we Malaysians. Bukit Kepong heroes are our pahlawan negara-bangsa kita.

Bukit Kepong heritage is ours and will forever be ours across ethnic and religious lines.

Similarly, I call Kampung Baru Cina our heritage across all racial, religious and cultural lines.

Which country does our Bahasa Malaysia belong to? Just the Malays? Really?

I read words in Sanskrit, words in Arabic, words in Urdu, words in English and many other words of other cultures.

 As with any art, language, adat and food, there is no single ethnically pure heritage but a combination of many.

To say a hungry child is a Malay or a Chinese or a Muslim or a Christian is leaving the values of humanity at the door.

A hungry child is a hungry child and deserves the help of all humans regardless of race, politics or faith.

Our blood and body cells are another juxtaposition of crossing ethnic, religious and political lines and yet the blood is still red for all.

Why are we arguing about our historical heritage as belonging to only one group and not enjoyed, honored and benefited by all in tourism economy?

Finally, the oceans and the hills, in one sense, do not belong to any one for it was here when none of us humans were in existence. Spiritually, it belongs to all of us.

When towns and villages were constructed, there was seldom one race involved but a cross cultural effort of technology, wealth, vision and culture.

When we speak and communicate, we carry a whole civilization of different peoples of different times and different conditions in our gestures and verbal sounds.

The magic and sanctity of humanity created by God is that we are all of us, and in us are all that we will ever be entwined within ourselves.

Failure to recognize that we are not “pure” (whatever “pure” might mean) but a mix of each and every one of us is failure of the highest form in education.

Malaysia is us and we are all Malaysians. Our history, good or bad, is ours to bear and to rejoice.

All of us depend on and are responsible for every individual, and everyone depends on and is responsible for all of us!

Negara kita, warisan semua!

(Prof Dr. Mohd Tajuddin Mohd Rasdi is Professor of Architecture at a local university and his writing reflects his own personal opinion entirely.)