Remarks by Nanta reflect a concern long felt by many in Sarawak, but often left unspoken, says activist Peter John Jaban

KUCHING, Jan 29 2026: Sarawak For Sarawakians (S4S) founder Peter John Jaban said that the remarks by Gabungan Parti Sarawak (GPS) secretary general Alexander Nanta Linggi in an interview with a private radio station reflected a concern long felt by many in Sarawak, but often left unspoken.

Peter John Jaban: For years, politics in Peninsular Malaysia has been increasingly dominated by racial and religious narrative 

In the interview, Nanta, who is also Works Minister, quoted by Dayak Daily, was reported to have suggested that the endless quarrels and bickering in Peninsular Malaysia have become so pervasive that perhaps Sarawak and the rest of the country were “never meant to be one nation”, separated by the South China Sea for a reason.

According to Dayak Daily, Nanta said Peninsular Malaysia has much to learn from the Sarawak Formula, an approach to governance credited to Premier Abang Johari Openg that prioritises racial and religious harmony alongside development.

Peter John, who is also Saya Anak Sarawak (SAS) founder, expressed his support to the remarks by Nanta.

“For years, politics in Peninsular Malaysia has been increasingly dominated by racial and religious narratives.

“Too many politicians and their supporters openly exploit race and faith as political tools,” he said, adding that the public discourse is frequently poisoned by intolerance, extremist rhetoric, and divisive language, creating an atmosphere of constant tension and instability.

He said as he has stated repeatedly over the years, these growing differences are one of the key reasons many Sarawakians feel increasingly disconnected from Peninsular Malaysian politics.

“This is part of the reasons why we Sarawakians are not keen to be part of Malaysia,” he alleged.

“What is deeply concerning is that the situation began to worsen significantly when Sarawak started asserting its constitutional rights under the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63).

“Legitimate demands for autonomy, fair resource management, and equal partnership were increasingly met with hostility, suspicion, and politicised racial narratives from certain quarters in West Malaysia.

“Instead of engaging these demands in good faith, some politicians and their supporters chose to frame Sarawak’s constitutional claims as threats questioning loyalty, stoking fear, and portraying rights-based demands as acts of defiance.

“This response exposed an unwillingness to accept Malaysia as a true partnership of equals,” Peter John said.

He added that the racial and religious rhetoric intensified as Sarawak insisted on what was already agreed upon at the formation of Malaysia.

He said this has only deepened the sense that Sarawak’s moderation and constitutional approach are incompatible with the increasingly confrontational and identity-driven politics dominating the peninsula.

“This growing hostility is not driven by Sarawak,” he said, pointing out that it is the result of refusal to honour agreements, coupled with political opportunism that exploits race and religion to silence legitimate constitutional discourse.

Peter John also said that Sarawakians and Sabahans are now uncomfortable being drawn into political, ideological, and racial tensions and instability that “we did not create”.

He said these developments have naturally led many Sarawakians to question whether their peace, identity, and future can be adequately protected within a political environment that thrives on division rather than respect.

He stressed that the sentiment does not arise from hatred or disloyalty. It arises from a desire to safeguard harmony, dignity, and stability values Sarawak has carefully preserved for generations.

He said there is nothing wrong, unreasonable, or extreme about Sarawak demanding the rights and guarantees promised to it.

“These are not new demands, nor are they acts of rebellion. They are constitutional rights and solemn promises made at the formation of Malaysia, rights that remain legally valid and morally binding.

He added since the formation of Malaysia, for decades, many of these promises were delayed, diluted, or left unfulfilled.

He said Sarawak exercised patience, chose dialogue over confrontation, and remained committed to the federation despite repeated postponements.

He stressed that the current assertion of MA63 rights is not aggression; it is a long-overdue correction of historical imbalance. Demanding what was agreed upon is not divisive.