source: http://phuakl.tripod.com/pssm/conference/day131.doc

  THE 4TH INTERNATIONAL MALAYSIAN STUDIES                                       CONFERENCE (MSC4)    3-5 AUGUST 2004 VENUE: UNIVERSITI KEBANGSAAN MALAYSIA (UKM)43600 BANGI, SELANGOR

MALAYSIA

       Khadijah Sidek and Tan Sri Fatimah Hashim: Two Contrasting Models of (Malay) Feminist Struggle?      Name of Panel: Politics and LeadershipDate of Panel:               3^rd August, 2004Time of Panel:               3.45- 5.15pm  Presenter:Helen TINGPhD CandidateInstitute of Political Studies of Paris,27, rue Saint Guillaume, 75337 Paris Cedex 07, France. Handphone number: 60-16-2482846Email: h.ting@sillon.net    

Introduction

 While Khadijah Sidek (1918-1982) is undoubtedly a controversial public figure, it might be no less controversial to call Fatimah Hashim (1924- ) a feminist. Fatimah herself has openly criticised ‘women’s liberation movement in the West’ speaking as the president of the National Council of Women’s Organisations in 1975. She stated that such movement is unwarranted for the women in our country and not suitable for the values of our nation (Azizah 1990:184). Hence it is perhaps necessary here to begin with a brief clarification on what I mean by feminist. In this paper, ‘feminist’ refers simply to someone who is aware of the subordinate social position of women in his/her society and attempts to do something to reduce the gender inequity.  Even from this definition, it is evident that Khadijah and Fatimah would not see eye to eye as to the evaluation of the women’s situation in this country as well as appropriate means to rectify it, hence the interest in comparing them. The only one common point that they share is that both of them had occupied the position of Ketua Kaum Ibu of UMNO, from 1954-56 for Khadijah Sidek and 1956-1972 for Fatimah Hashim respectively.  

Brief political history of Khadijah Sidek

 Khadijah Sidek was born on the 15^th of December, 1918 in a small town in West Sumatra called Pariaman (Firdaus 1997:53). She developed anti-colonial political consciousness while she was studying in a Dutch secondary school in Padang, 54 km from Pariaman in 1931. She joined student organisations such as Keputerian Indonesia Muda (K.I.M.) and Kepanduan Bangsa Indonesia (KBI). As members of these clubs, they often skipped classes as a sign of protest, adopting ‘merdeka’ as their slogan and sang prohibited nationalist songs such as Indonesia Raya. On the third year, she together with 30-40 other schoolmates was expelled from school. After persistent endeavour against various obstacles, she eventually managed to graduate from teacher’s training course in what was called a Normal School in Padang Panjang. Upon graduation, she wanted to teach in a private school so that she could be free to “train the pupils there to fight for independence” (Khatijah 2001:43). However, she eventually had to follow the official posting of Dutch administration from one place to another. When she was posted in Binjai between 1938-39, she founded an organisation called Semangat Bunda. While the official activities of the organisation were socially oriented such as cooking and sewing classes, every opportunity was used to spread anti-colonial political consciousness. At the end of Japanese occupation, she conspired with youth and bomoh of her village to steal weapons from the Japanese. She wanted to use them to fight the return of the Dutch to Indonesia. As a consequence, she had to flee from Pariaman to Bukit Tinggi to escape the Japanese military capture. In Bukit Tinggi, she established with her sister a women’s section of Badan Keamanan Rakyat (BKR), Puteri Kesateria, on the 11^th November 1945. They also set up a military training school for girls, the Taman Pendidekan Puteri Kesatria. (Manderson 1978:33) In July 1947, Khadijah arrived in Singapore for the second time. She had wanted to establish a branch of the training school for Puteri Kesateria and to enable her students to learn English at the school. However, soon after during the same month, the Dutch launched the so-called ‘police action’ attacking nationalist supporters and took control of Sumatra and parts of Java. Khadijah was on the wanted list of the Dutch police. She could not return to Sumatra and hence had become unintentionally a political refugee (NI 1980:7; UMNO 1974:18). In Singapore, she founded HIMWIM (Himpunan Wanita Indonesia-Malaya) with a former schoolmate. Under cover as a social welfare group, HIMWIM aimed to strengthen anti-colonial sentiments among its members. Manderson (1978) observed that her initial intention and action appeared to be working towards the idea of Indonesia Raya. (p.35) In June 1948, a state of emergency was declared in Malaya. Khadijah was arrested and imprisoned in Singapore without trial in October 1948. She was accused of being pro-communist and involving in subversive activities against the British administration. The British also claimed that she smuggled gold and opium into Malaya in exchange for weapons to be smuggled back to Indonesia. (Khatijah 2001:88, Saliha 2001:20) All the accusations were never proven officially.  By then she was just married for about 4 months and was already pregnant. She gave birth to her first child while still serving as political prisoner. Khadijah was released in January 1950 but was put under ten-year curfew and residential restriction order in Johore. Invited twice by Hajjah Zain to join UMNO, her admission was accepted by Tunku Abdul Rahman early April 1953 after the exit of Dato’ Onn bin Jaafar. At that stage, UMNO was at all point low due to the after effect of the resignation of Dato’ Onn. Khadijah quoted Tunku as describing the UMNO as “a piece of lousy cloth which was hard to sell” (sekeping kain buruk tak laku dijual). She in turn likened the Kaum Ibu (women’s wing) of UMNO then as “grass growing on stones” (kerakap tumbuh di batu). (NI 1980:9)  Her political eminence rose rapidly as she worked hard with other members of KI Johor Branch to recruit more members. At the UMNO Congress end of 1953 in Alor Star she was appointed by Tunku Abdul Rahman to the UMNO supreme council. She also asked later to be appointed as the UMNO KI Information Officer so as to be able to tour the whole peninsula in order to rally more village women to join UMNO. A few months after that she was also chosen to be the Secretary for Women’s Affairs (Setiausaha Hal Ehwal Wanita) and acting Ketua Kaum Ibu. There after, Khadijah travelled the whole peninsula tirelessly to recruit more members, reactivate inactive branches and establish more KI branches. While the overall figures are not available, according to herself, during the 10 months period she was working as Information Officer for KI, she managed to establish 130 branches throughout the country and recruit around 10,000 members[1] (Khatijah 2001:128). She was elected as the national leader of KI in the General Assembly held in October 1954 in Penang. This had happened not without incidents. Even though she was nominated and had agreed to contest the post following the procedure, her name was not put forward for voting during the assembly. She protested and walked out. After being persuaded to return to the assembly, she was voted in as the national leader of the Women’s section. During the assembly, the Women’s section also put forward their resolution urging the plenary to allocate five out of 35 UMNO seats for women candidates to contest in the upcoming election to the Federal Legislative Council in July 1955. A number of men delegates took the floor and opposed the proposal. Hearing these speeches, Khadijah intervened angrily. Two weeks later, Johor Bahru UMNO division tried to expel her but did not succeed.  UMNO eventually filed Halimahton binti Abdul Majid as the sole woman candidate of the Alliance and she won in Ulu Selangor district. The Selangor KI put pressure on Tunku Abdul Rahman to appoint Khadijah Sidek to one of the five reserve seats on the Council or face boycot of September state elections. The women’s section of Bukit Mertajam branch also threatened to boycott the Alliance in the town council elections. Tunku did not comply and gave the reason that she was still under a bond of good conduct. (Dancz 1987:97-8) 

In September 1956, a resolution was again passed by the Johor Bahru UMNO division to expel Khadijah Sidek. This time, the Supreme Council upheld the decision in her absence[2]. Many KI sections held emergency meetings to discuss the crisis and threatened a mass protest against the expulsion. Tunku appealed to them and UMNO Secretary-General, Senu Abdul Rahman stated that a directive had been issued to all the KI sections not to protest the expulsion. (Dancz 1987:98)

 When the incident happened, her husband had just passed away in May of the same year. Hence the expulsion landed her in greater financial difficulties, with 3 children of hers and 4 girls who stayed with her to feed. She struggled to get by doing sewing and selling clothes. Her sister in London also remitted some money to her. At the end of 1958, she was persuaded by Dr Burhanuddin to join Pan-Malayan Islamic Party (PMIP). During the election campaign in 1959 she campaigned vigorously for PMIP. PMIP managed to take control of the state governments in Kelantan and Terengganu. Khadijah won her parliamentary seat in Dungun, Terengganu.  During her five-year term as a parliamentarian, she participated actively in the parliamentary sessions and spoke on various issues such as girls’ education and vocational formation, rural economic development, health infrastructure in rural areas and the like (Rohana 2003: 51-56). Her outspokenness and public speaking skill had won her much respect and fame, though occasional mistakes in triviality also invited tease (Firdaus 1997:62). When Khadijah joined the party in late 1958, the women’s section of PMIP, Dewan Muslimat, was weak, with members numbering between 700 to 800. She was immediately appointed to be a member of the Supreme Council by Dr Burhanuddin, President of the party. She was the first woman to sit in the Council. At that time, the leader of DM did not automatically sit on the Supreme Council of the party. She sat in the council not as a representative of the DM but as a PMIP member. (Dancz 1987:133) The electoral success of Khadijah in 1959 is said to have caused an increase in DM membership. She managed to generate higher interests in politics among Malay women through her intensive campaign. Within a few months after the General Election, she already managed to establish four branches of DM. (Rohana 2003:49) She became the president of DM from 1963 to 1966 (Dancz 1987:134). By 1963, membership of the women’s section rose to 3,000. It continued to grow to around 8500 members in 1966. Nevertheless, it was noted that there was a lack of grassroot women leaders. Hence its members were very dependent on the national leadership. (Rohana 2003:49) In 1964 she lost the electoral contest under the ticket of PMIP at both parliamentary and state levels in Johor. It was partly due to the success of the Alliance propaganda campaign in attacking the image of PMIP. Moreover, PMIP as well as Khadijah overestimated ground support for them, especially in Johore State which has always been the stronghold of UMNO. PMIP only managed to garner majority support in Kelantan both at parliamentary and state levels (NSTP Research and Information Services 1994: 31, 33, 48-49). Following the death of Ustaz Zulkiflee Mohammad and imprisonment of Dr Burhanuddin Al-Helmy, two key leaders of PMIP who were supportive of her, she fell out with Dato Mohammad Asri bin Hj. Muda who became Deputy President in 1964 and Acting President from the time of Dr Burhanuddin’s arrest. In 1969, she withdrew as a member of the Islamic party and contested as an independent candidate against Asri Muda. She lost badly and her deposit was confiscated. In 1971, Khadijah returned to UMNO. While holding local leadership position, she was no longer active at national or state level. Instead, she devoted more of her efforts to social and religious educational work as FELDA settlers officer as well as in PERKIM (Pertubuhan Kebajikan Islam Malaysia). From 1977, she began to have difficulties to move around and needed a wheelchair (Firdaus 1997:62). She passed away in 1982.  

Political Journey of Fatimah Hashim

 The political journey of Fatimah Hashim, when compared with that of Khadijah Sidek, was unbelieveably smooth sailing. Fatimah Hashim has been the longest serving national Ketua Kaum Ibu of UMNO. Aided administratively by a full-time secretary from 1959, she managed to increase the KI membership by around 100,000 within a decade (Manderson 1980:114). Fatimah was born on the Christmas Day in 1924 in Muar, Johore. She is the third child of 15 brothers and sisters. She also has 9 other step-siblings from the second wife of her father. (Nik Safiah et al. 2003:1) Unlike Khadijah, she has only had 5 years of vernacular elementary education (Muhamad Rizal 2002:12-13). Her initiation to politics began in a timid way in the midst of political turmoil of Malayan Union protests. The favourable climate for political engagement in her family had played a critical role in encouraging her to get involved. Her father had joined and supported UMNO since its foundation in 1946 (Nik Safiah et al. 2003:7)[3]. She recalled that whenever there was a political gathering, she would peep and listen from inside a house nearby the venue of the ceramah. (Nik Safiah et al. 2003:6) Her mother-in-law, Puan Safiah, also joined UMNO in 1947 and became the leader of Kampung Parit Sakai branch in Muar besides being active in social welfare activities in her village. (Nik Safiah et al. 2003:12-13) Most important of all, her husband, Abdul Kadir Yusof, had been extremely supportive of her political involvement. As a couple, they often talked about the situations of poor and illiterate villagers and discussed ways to solve social problems faced by them. Abdul Kadir sensed the interests and leadership potential of his wife and motivated her to engage herself seriously and aim to raise their plights in the parliament and find solutions through participation in the government. (Nik Safiah et al. 2003:13-14) Fatimah joined UMNO in 1947 as member number 350. She became a committee member of Kampong Nong Chik Branch KI in Johor Bahru the following year. (Nik Safiah et al. 2003:7-9) Due to frequent transfer of her husband as civil servant, she had to switch base a few times within Johore state.  Between 1953-55, she stayed in England for less than two years to accompany her husband who further his law studies on government scholarship. There she became part of the social circle of Malay law students and their family there, the so-called ‘London Club’. A number of them subsequently became key political leaders of our country and colleagues of Fatimah and Abdul Kadir: Abdul Razak, Sardon Jubir, Hussein Onn, Zahir Ismail. (Nik Safiah et al. 2003:27-8) Within a month upon return, Abdul Kadir was posted to Ipoh as Magistrate. After a short break, Fatimah was invited to become the divisional head of UMNO KI for Ipoh-Menglembu as well as the leader for KI Ipoh branch. Due to lack of woman leadership in Perak, Fatimah took over the position of Perak state chief of UMNO KI as well. (Nik Safiah et al. 2003:37-8) When the decision to expel Khadijah Sidek was finalised at the UMNO Supreme Council in November 1956, Fatimah Hashim was appointed to take over the Ketua position at the age of 32. This meant that she automatically became a member of the UMNO Supreme Council as well. In 1959 when Abdul Kadir was transferred to Kedah, Fatimah relinquished her UMNO positions at state and divisional levels in Perak. She was also assigned to be the Parliamentary candidate for Jitra-Padang Terap Constituency in Kedah in the 1959 General Election. She was elected and retained the seat for three consecutive terms. She decided to retire after losing her KI leadership position to Aishah Ghani in 1972. Fatimah became the first female minister of the country on 22 May 1969. As Social Welfare Minister, her first task was to handle the aftermath of the May 13 riot. She held the position until 23^rd February 1973. In addition, she also decided not to seek re-election as a parliamentarian in 1974. In terms of social work, she has been most frequently associated with NCWO (National Council of Women’s Organisations Malaysia) and the yearly celebration of National Women’s Day on the 25^th of August since 1962. The date of Women’s Day (Hari Wanita) was chosen based on the date of the establishment of Pergerakan Kaum Ibu UMNO in 1949. It aims to highlight the role played by women in nation-building as well as to unite women from all ethnic origins to improve their lot. (Nik Safiah et al. 2003:116, Dancz 1987:140) KI UMNO, under the leadership of Fatimah, convened all women’s organisations, including the women’s section of all political parties, to organise and participate in it. The success of Hari Wanita celebration inspired Fatimah Hashim to contact Mrs Rasamma Bhupalan, leader of the pro tem committee of the new Council of Women’s Organisations[4]. She proposed to merge the group she convened for Hari Wanita with the new Women’s Council led by Mrs Bhupalan to represent all the women of Malaya. Subsequently, NCWO was officially formed as an advisory, coordinating and consultative body at the second Hari Wanita. It organises the yearly celebration of Hari Wanita and makes recommendations on issues which touch on women’s conditions and status. (Dancz 1987:140-141) Over the year, it has become an important voice on behalf of female interests in Malaysia. Nevertheless, since it works for reform for women from within the establishment, its scope of action is also limited by such conditions (Lai 2003:60). Fatimah was at its foundation one of the Deputy presidents of NCWO. Two years later, she was elected as the president. She held this position for 24 years until she retired in 1989. (Nik Safiah et al. 2003:126) Through lobbying activities of NCWO, certain laws unfavourable to Malaysian women were amended. One political milestone was the granting of equal pay to women employees. At Hari Wanita celebration in 1974, NCWO initiated Tun Fatimah Gold Medal to be awarded to prominent women in recognition of their “contribution and excellent service rendered to the country, race, religion and society”. (Nik Safiah et al. 2003:124)  

Contrasting Gender Personae

 

Khadijah Sidek as Puteri Kesateria

 Khadijah grew up as the favourite child of her parents. As a baby girl with nine elder brothers preceeding her, her birth was the ultimate answer to assiduous prayers and meticulous rituals executed by her parents. The matrilineal Minangkabau tradition of her parents stipulated that only a female child could inherit and pass on the properties of the family.  In her memoir, she recounted how her parents gave her the best food as compared with her elder brothers, much to their jealousy and indignation. As a child, her mother also dressed her up to bring her to every public functions she attended. When she had grown to schooling age, her religious mother had intended to send her to a religious school so that she would become a religious leader. On the other hand, her father wanted her to become a doctor and preempted his wife’s plan by registering her at a Dutch primary school. One could hence argue that Khadijah grew up in a family environment whereby she was valued highly as a girl. She was never socialised to be a lesser being than a male. Quite the contrary, her social role to pass on family heritage to the female posterity of her lineage was seen as crucial. Her parents did not bring her up expecting her to be just a home-maker. In effect, her mother wanted her to become a religious leader which generally had a high social respectability in her society; while her father intended her to become a doctor.  Hence in the social world of gender relations of Khadijah, she did not see the primary role of woman as necessarily being at home, as a wife and mother. On the contrary, in the scheme of anti-colonial struggle, to which she dedicated her ultimate life vocation, she saw women as equal partners to men.  This is clear from her dialogue with the first Indonesian Defence Minister, Amir Sjarifuddin, after his inspection of her voluntary women paramilitary, Puteri Kesatria. While he was pleased and appreciative with the trained women paramilitary, he stressed that time had not come for women to fight on the frontline of battlefield because there were still a lot of male soldiers. Khadijah replied in her speech that it was also necessary to train female paramiliatary personnel to combat because the battle might get worse. In this way, women soldiers were ready, should Indonesia fell into the hands of the Dutch, to fight shoulder-to-shoulder with the men and ready to sacrifice ourselves, and not bow to the authority of the enemy. In her memoir, she also commented that he said so because he being a man did not like to see women be ‘too independent’. (Khatijah 2001:67) Khadijah had gone through the disillusionment of man as the ultimate protector of woman. She observed how during the Japanese occupation, village girls were either taken away to work as prostitutes in the military camps or became wives of senior Japanese officers. She asked where all the men and religious elders were when it happened. (Khatijah 2001:62-3) Hence it could be seen that her position on gender role and relations was even radical in the context of revolutionary Indonesian context. It was not surprising that Malay conservative leaders in UMNO could not see eye to eye with her on this matter. For Saliha Hassan (2001:17) the outstanding feature of the personality of Khadijah is embodied in the spirit and character of a kesateria. Part of the lyrics of the song Puteri Kesateria, the song for the women paramilitary group that she founded, say:Bersemangat KesateriaLagi jujur dan relaUntuk capai maksudnyaBerani berkorban jiwa[5] A kesateria is a courageous hero, a warrior. Puteri Kesateria depicts a woman fighter with a free and upright spirit, “progressive in her thinking, militant in her action and egalitarian in her attitude”, to achieve the higher aim of liberation of her country from colonialism. (Saliha 2001:17) For Khadijah, the struggle for the uplift of woman’s social position, the conscientisation of women’s awareness of their social rights and duties as well as the organisation of women to participate in the country’s development are inseparable and a single struggle. A Puteri Kesateria is at the same time an independence fighter and a champion of women’s interests. To what extent was Khadijah’s idea indigenous? Was she too influenced by her Dutch  education? One could argue that she integrated different elements of tradition and modernity based on her own experience and observation. In fact, it was a historical feature of the Minangkabau people in West Sumatra to stress both ‘the continuing worth of ancient wisdom’ yet ‘recognizes the importance of change’. (Taufik Abdullah 1971:1) She did not disengage herself completely from traditional gender discourse. She recounted how when she taught the Japanese officials Indonesian language as well as culture, she told them that Islam prohibit a woman to go out with a man. She also stressed that they should respect women which was the accepted norm in the village, in order to avoid trouble. (Khatijah 2001:51) When she was trying to escape being taken away by the Japanese, she said that she felt like it was better for her to die with her sister rather than letting the Japanese do anything on them. She reasoned that should anything happen to them it would cause ‘great shame’ on her family because they came from ‘good family’. (Khatijah 2001:49) She was active in anti-polygamy movement in Indonesia (NI 1980:7) but she had nothing against marriage. She married off her younger sister during the Japanese occupation to “ensure her safety” (Khatijah 2001:60). However, as for herself, she was too engaged in the resistance movement to even consider it.  How did she subsequently end up contradicting her own position by becoming the second wife of Dr Hamzah Taib? Saliha (2001:23) commented that this fact was detrimental to her image as an “avid anti-poligamist”. It is clear that the fact of her having to settle down in Malaya, in a particular socio-political context uprooted from her home had obliged her to eventually take the option. Without any financial support[6], it was much like starting her life anew, from scratch in Singapore. Her means of livelihood was rather precarious in this foreign land[7], unlike when she was at Pariaman whereby family land enabled her and her family not to worry too much about their daily subsistence.  Khadijah had resisted the proposal for her to get married all along. She recounted how upon returning from Padang after her expulsion from school in 1933, her mother wanted her to get married which she rejected with all her force. Her mother again raised the issue of marriage upon her completion of teacher’s training course but she wanted to go out and work. In her own words, she wants to “see the world, .. to be a leader of women and to better the lot of women” (Khatijah 201:44); “to look for experience, and to fight for our country” (p.45)[8]. However, the socio-cultural climate in Malaya, both in terms of political development as well as in terms of women’s conditions, was far more conservative as compared with Sumatra. This she could already observe the first time she visited Malaya in 1946. From the point of view of political awareness and spirit, she described the difference between women in Malaya and Indonesia as “day with night”. (Khatijah 2001:71, NI 1980:6)  Even as her political fame was building up due to the frequent public speeches she made, and also because of it as well, she continually faced more and more social pressure from the elder members of her own association, HIMWIM to get married. In 1947-48, the Dutch were winning the war in Indonesia and Sukarno and other nationalists were jailed. She was also on the wanted list of the Dutch authority. In addition, the elders reminded her that a 30-year-old spinster was not socially well regarded in the local Malay society. They also argued that a husband would provide her shelter in terms of social acceptability and physical safety, especially for her case as a foreigner on high socio-political profile. (Khatijah 2001:83, NI 1980:7, Manderson 1978:37) She mentioned in her interview with Nadi Insan in 1980 that she had not wished to marry even though she eventually did. She attributed this to God’s will. Her admirer, Dr Hamzah Taib managed to win her heart. She saw that he accepted and respected her political visions and commitments fully. She finally agreed to marrying him, even as a second wife, with the condition that she would not be deterred in any way in her anti-colonial and liberation political involvement. (Khatijah 2001:84)  

Fatimah Hashim as Tun Fatimah

 By comparison, Fatimah Hashim’s point of view on gender role is quite conventionally traditional. Nik Safiah et al. (2003) noted that she has grown up in a strong religious family background (p.2). She was adopted by her childless paternal aunty until the age of 13. Her adopted father was a mosque muezzin. At the death of her adopted mother, she was returned to her natural parents. She confides that she has never felt neglected or unloved growing up in her big merry family with 23 siblings and step-siblings. (Nik Safiah et al. 2003:ii) For Fatimah, the primary role of a woman is in the domestic sphere. She thinks that it is important for women to pay attention to and be aware of the development in their society and country. However, for her, the purpose of doing so was in order that they could educate their children properly. (Azizah 1990:199-200) This was clearly and explicitly espoused in a speech as she spoke on ‘The role of woman in Nation Building’. She stressed the same point again even as she made the speech of acceptance of her honorary degree in law from the University of Malaya in 1975. She said that the true struggle of a woman begins with her efforts to build a wholesome household and family. (Azizah 1990:237) What does she think about women’s involvement in the public workplace and politics? She mentioned three categories of social activities engaged by Malaysian women which contributes directly to the development of the country: i)                    those who work as employees in public and private sectors, ii)                   those who are self-employed in rubber smallholdings or small business venture, as well as iii)                 those who are involved in voluntary and social welfare work.  However, she pointed out that those who are involved do not necessarily do it with clear awareness of national goals and priorities and hence acting accordingly. Therefore, for her, the principal duty of these women was to educate and lead other women in order that they cooperate and contribute towards the achievement of national priorities of development. (Azizah 1990:201-2) What about women in politics? She recognises the rights of all women to political engagement for “it is our right as citizen”. However, she stressed that they would need to be “sincere” in order not to be “afraid and worried”. (Azizah 1990:3)[9] According to her, “we must know very clearly where our limits are in fighting for our rights and freedom.” (Azizah 1990:237) She is critical of feminist movements in the West, which she sees as unsuitable for the culture and values of our country. She criticised feminists in the West for obliging their husbands to do their housework, which she saw as the duties of women. She stressed that “we in Malaysia” had never campaigned so that women be “equated” with men but that they be given the same rights so that women can play a greater role in nation building. (Azizah 1990:184) Hence for her, the rights and freedom of women should serve first and foremost the national interests. It is clear that her understanding of women’s role in political parties goes in the same logic. In her speech to the delegates of UMNO women’s wing assembly in 1972, she said that “man would not put us on a pedestal if we do not know where our position is. Beside our firmness in our struggle, good character and politeness are the basic characteristics and rule of conduct of women. These are the feminine characteristics that men pay attention to”. (Azizah 1990:141) Even as she affirmed social justice as her struggle, her comprehension of social justice is definitely at variance from that of Khadijah’s. Her perspective on gender role and gender relations remain one of the conservative, traditional era. In 1974, in conjunction with the Malaysian Women’s Day, the NCWO under the presidency of Tan Sri Fatimah initiated Tun Fatimah Gold Medal award. It is revealing that the name of Tun Fatimah is being evoked. Tun Fatimah is a personality mentioned in Sejarah Melayu. She was the daughter of Bendahara Seri Maharaja Melaka and the wife of Tun Ali. Both her father and husband were condemned to death by Sultan Mahmud Shah for defamation. Sultan Mahmud Shah then took her as his wife. Eventually, according to the chronicle, Tun Fatimah managed to convert the greedy and cruel king into one that was just and much loved by the people. Sejarah Melayu described Sultan Mahmud as being moved by the beauty and purity of Tun Fatimah. (Nik Safiah Karim et al. 2003:124-5) It could be surmised that the image of Tun Fatimah embodies the ideal of womanhood for Fatimah Hashim.    

Leadership Profile

 The leadership style of Khadijah Sidek and Fatimah Hashim are quite different. However, they do share some of the characteristics as leaders: commitment, diligence, dedication, approachability, strong character and a strong sense of mission. There is no doubt that their differing understanding of gender role had had a contrasting effect on their leadership style. In addition, it could be demonstrated that the socio-cultural context in Malaya had also had a definitive impact on the effectiveness of their leadership. 

Socio-cultural dimension of Malay women leadership

 Wazir-Jahan Karim (1983:724-5) made a few characterisations of Malay women political leadership[10]: i)                    they were often the wives of Malay political elite;ii)                   there appear to be a greater tendency for women with close kinsmen of the older generation with past/parallel political involvement to get involved politically themselves;iii)                 Those who possessed professional skills and qualifications such as journalism, teaching or broadcasting. The social climate of the Malay society at the time of independence was still a very traditional and hierarchical one. Roff (1994:218, 202, 230) described the Malay political life in the 1930s as “highly authoritarian”. The business of politics was seen as the prerogative of traditional Malay elite. Ordinary Malay would have nothing to do with politics, who otherwise would be seen as stepping out of his sphere of competence, as derhaka. A frequently repeated refrain then was that ‘no Malay can betray his Raja’. This condition has persisted till after the war. It was not by chance that the initial leaders of UMNO were mostly from the royalty lineage. Khadijah Sidek remarked that even a Malay man would be afraid to mention the word ‘merdeka’[11]. Indeed, when she went around meeting villagers as the Information Officer of UMNO KI with Tunku Abdul Rahman, she related how even Tunku became fearful when she preached ‘merdeka’. (Khatijah 2001:124-125) Moreover, even within the KI, the attitude of many of the women leaders themselves were also very conservative when it came to the issue of the public role of women. Khadijah had criticised openly the UMNO women leadership for not being sensitive to the situation and importance of ordinary women, especially those in the rural areas. (Saliha Hassan 2001:) She described “most of the Johor KI members were still full of the feudalistic idea that a leader should be someone with the honorary title of Tengku or Datin”. She also said that during meetings, those who considered themselves VIPs all sat together at a special spot, separate from the rest of the members. (Khatijah 2001) In such status conscious context, the odds were staked against the political involvement of even a male commoner. Naturally, Khadijah would have to overcome even greater resistance as a woman leader.  There were three key issues that marked her social identity to her disfavour. They served as convenient weapons again and again by her opponents to dismiss or discredit her whenever political expediency warrants: i)                    that despite her radical discourse for women’s emancipation, she herself had agreed to become the second wife (Ramlah 1980:53);ii)                   that she had been detained for allegedly being ‘pro-communist’[12] (Ramlah 1980:53);iii)                 that she is an ‘orang luar’ (outsider)[13] (Manderson 1978:40). In addition, at that time, in the words of Nik Safiah et al. (2003), “a woman is being assessed based on the social position of her husband, and not on the personal capability of the woman. She was seen only as the appendix to the husband”. (p.60) Fatimah herself has recounted how on her train journey, some KI women leaders tried to discourage her from taking up the responsibilities as KI leader. One of them, while congratulated her, also asked who her husband was and what his occupation was. (Nik Safiah et al. 2003:59-60)  Fatimah had the advantage that her husband was then a Deputy Public Prosecutor to Attorney General[14]. In addition, the precedence of her family involvement in politics would have given her an added legitimacy in her own political adventure. From that point of view too, there is a certain disadvantage experienced by Khadijah in the eyes of the elite male leadership of UMNO. Not only was she the second wife, albeit to a medical doctor; her husband, Dr Hamzah Taib was a well known opposition figure against UMNO in Johore. Emerged as a Malay grassroot leader in Muar, he was the number one critic of Dato Onn Jaafar. He and his organisation, Lembaga Kesatuan Melayu Johor (LKMJ) are described by Ramlah (1991) as the ‘thorn in flesh’ to Dato Onn and UMNO (p.10). Therefore, it was understandable that Dato Onn rejected outright the application for UMNO membership of Khadijah while giving other convenient excuse. Hence it is not surprising that a woman leader at that time could not stand on her personal merit alone. She usually needed the patronage of the top male leadership in order to be able to carry out reform and changes. This was clearly the case for both Khadijah Sidek as well as for Fatimah Hashim[15].  

Political Agitator Versus Institutional Builder

 The leadership role of Khadijah could be characterised as a political agitator and conscientiser. Her approach was emotive, radical and progressive. She was a gifted public speaker who drew crowd to herself. On the contrary, Fatimah Hashim acted more in the role as an institutional builder. She was a woman of order and details. She complained how when she first took over the leadership of KI from Khadijah, she discovered that not a single dossier had been filed properly. It was described how she put in order the filing system of KI subsequently.  Fatimah was also good in fund raising for the organisation. She shared how she only found $2.40 in the KI UMNO Perak funds when she took over and she managed to raise $1,600.  

Attitude towards authority

 From the point of view of Khadijah Sidek, respect for authority should be based on principled legitimacy of the leader. In other words, she would not accept the authority that she deemed unjust or unreasonable. This is consistent with her tendency to try to change or challenge social norms and system that she judged unacceptable. From this point of view, she was unafraid of incurring conflicts and contestations. In fact, her life testimony is filled with examples of her courageous and determined intervention to change the course of her destiny and to effectuate social change against all odds stacked against her.  One example of her determination and persistence was her struggle from the young age of 13 years old to overcome various huddles to complete her studies[16]. Another example was her courage to challenge religious norms over the uniform of Puteri Kesateria, a female paramilitary group founded by her with her sister. The military uniforms worn by her trainees, being the same style as that for men, were initially criticised strongly for going against the Islamic norm. She challenged and argued against the village elders and nationalist leaders, all male, and managed to persuade them to agree to her point of view. (Khatijah 2001:62-63)[17] Such instances of her courage and success have earned her much respect in her social milieu in Sumatra. It must have instilled in her a firm self-confidence in negotiating with authorities, even to challenge them. In his biographic presentation of Khadijah Sidek, Firdaus (1997:54) asked whether there could have been a ‘Khadijah Sidek’ who does not encounter as much conflicts and controversies. As a Malay woman of her courage with her past trajectory of revolutionary experience, it appears to be quite inevitable in the course of her struggle for women’s political emancipation in the conservative social atmosphere of Malaya. On the other hand, the popular image of Fatimah Hashim has been projected as ‘soft and easy to handle’[18] (Nik Safiah et al. 2003:94). She appeared to blend well with the UMNO culture of moderateness, avoidance of conflict, give and take attitude and obeisance to the hierarchy (Kamilia 1998:106).  It could be noted that her perspective for reforms usually were ‘conservative’ in nature and oriented to social conformity. In other words, her arguments would usually not be geared towards challenging the status quo but rather towards the necessity to ‘be updated’ or ‘keep up with’ the era[19]. In pursuance of her political objectives, her usual strategy would be to concentrate on trying to persuade Tunku Abdul Rahman (Kamilia 1998:106) instead of getting herself into any controversies with others. Even so, in her efforts to lobby Tunku to push through equal wages for both man and woman, she was blamed by UMNO members for incurring additional national expenses up to a sum of $4.2 million (Rohana 2003:91).  

Bottom-up Versus Top-down

 From this point of view, the style of leadership of Fatimah could be characterised as ‘top-down’ oriented as contrast to the style of that of populist Khadijah. Nik Safiah et al. (2003:40-42) documented the strategy of recruitment by Fatimah while acting as the leader of the women’s wing in Ipoh. She would first task herself to recruit the officials’ wives as well as other women in position of influence such as those coming from aristocratic family into UMNO as committee members. By doing so, she increased the social acceptability of UMNO in the eyes of public and hence facilitated mass recruitment which followed. In a way, it is understandable as her social milieu consisted of these wives of government officials and people of aristocratic background. In contrast, Khadijah tended to be bottom-up in her way of organising people. As the Information Officer of women’s wing of UMNO, she travelled tirelessly to all parts of Malaya in order to plead for the cause of and spirit for the Independence of Malaya from British (Khatijah 2001:118-119, 124-125) and rally Malay village women to UMNO. The strength of her political base tended towards appealing for mass support. She tended to achieve her political goal through applying popular political pressure. The orientation of Khadijah was egalitarian and she identified with the masses. When she commented on the name Ardjasni given to the little group she formed in the secondary school, she explained that Ardjasni being a common flower found amidst the grass symbolises ‘our ordinary people’. And it is from the common people that great things come, she commented. (Khatijah 2001:42) She was critical of the ‘feudal’ attitude of some of the UMNO woman’s wing members. She described them as ‘usually stuck up, and had nice clothes, big houses and cars, and did not talk easily to the people’. (Khatijah 2001:121) She also recounted how the villagers told her that they were afraid to join UMNO because all the members were rich people; that during meetings they sat at the back and the leaders pretended that they were not there. She reassured an older woman that she was not rich either as a leader, that the rich and the poor should show mutual respect and sit next to each other. This displeased the local head of the said women’s branch who was a Datin and she left the party. Nevertheless, a lot more other ordinary village folk joined the party. (Khatijah 2001:114) Khadijah attributed the success of her recruitment drive for UMNO to the fact that she approached them as an equal, sleeping and eating with them and was concerned about their children. She clearly stated that her mission was to mobilise the common people on the ground, not the “upper crust”. (Khatijah 2001:121)  She also tried to train some of the women members to take up the responsibility and functions of local leaders. While training them, she shared with them what she conceived as leadership qualities:

‘You must not be proud, be humble; listen to criticism but don’t be depressed; treat everyone equally, rich or poor, like sisters. If your attitude is like this, then you will be successful wherever you go.’ (Khatijah 2001:123)

 To sum up, her style was more of a woman activist, a liberation fighter against colonialism and male chauvinism. Rafidah Aziz described the leadership style of Fatimah as ‘motherly’. As a mother, her role was to set an example for others as well as to indicate the way to go about. When she first joined, she together with others who were as young as her and not so experienced would just follow simply. She noted that such leadership style had its relevance at its time. However, nowadays, she could no longer use such style to lead, as the nature of membership has evolved. (Azizah 1990:86) From this angle, her approach could be termed as more hierarchical, as the relationship between the elder and the younger or the expert with the inexperienced. When she became the first woman minister of the country, she was described as the eldest big ‘woman boss’ of the country. (Azizah 1990:110)  

Conclusions

 Numerous social commentators and commentaries on Khadijah Sidek, while acknowledging her public oratory skills and anti-colonial credentials, often add the critical ‘buts’ especially on her fiery and confrontational style. They would comment on the socio-political climate of UMNO and the Malay society as consensus seeking and avoidance of direct confrontations. By the extension of the same logic, the soft and non-conflictual style of Fatimah Hashim would be attributed as the reason for the success of her political career. Such yardstick, however, would only apply to those who are on the weaker side of power relations. It is an indication of the reality of the inequality of gender relations. For someone such as our former Prime Minister, verbal abrasiveness and direct criticism do not diminish his statesmanship. Nor does such fact affect his firm and long lasting control of UMNO for more than two decades. To a certain extent, such conservative and hierarchical dynamics still dominates the political arena in Malaysia. Open verbal challenge and criticisms are generally not seen in a positive light. The privileged approach and acceptable political practice in relating to the authority concerned are still back door negotiations and lobbying; or in other cases, worse still, political conformity (Kamilia 1998:109). From the point of view of autonomous women’s groups attempting to effectuate change, two issues are pertinent here. The first is the reality of the lack of political power on the part of women in our society. Secondly, it is the prevalence of the so-called ‘authority-syndrome’[20].  As an example, Tan et al. (1994) attributed the success of the campaign for law reforms on rape (passed by the Parliament in 1989) to the avoidance by the Joint Action Group on Violence Against Women to present the issue as a fundamental challenge to the traditional gender relations paradigm. Hence it was not seen as posing an immediate threat to men’s political power. (p. 28-29) Even so, the Domestic Violence Act, which is more sensitive, especially on the issue as to whether it should cover Muslim women, took a decade of campaign to be legislated. Moreover, the Act in its final and compromised form which was passed was not totally satisfactory to the women’s organisations (Ng and Chee 1999:182-185). This is perhaps not surprising, given the nature of State-NGO relationship. The NGOs are generally seen as trouble makers for the smooth functioning of the State machinery. Various legislative measures had been put in place in order to restrict and repress associative bodies which were seen as threats to the government. Hence Martinez (2003:83) argued that NGO activism has been contained and even scripted by the State. ‘Scripted’ because ‘the state is overwhelmingly dominant and powerful, so the paradigm and rhetoric of women’s activism combines protest with supplication to the state’.  In a similar light, Ong (1999:366-7) also observed that the growth of Muslim feminism takes place in the expedient context of an emerging state strategy to control the traditional forces in Islam. She asked how, if the government were to be sincere believer of progressive Islam, it could reconcile supporting women’s movement against wife-beating while rejected the notion of marital rape for Muslim couples. Martinez (2003:84) noted that in the long run this manifest sense of powerlessness in the face of pervasive and powerful State “infantilises the entire population, not just women”. It reduces its citizens, including the women, to ‘being obedient, wheedling or recalcitrant children’. Women-friendly social policy is not a favour or reward to be sought and dispensed. Women’s concerns, issues and problems should be recognised as an integral element in the formulation of government’s policy and not subservient to the ‘national priority’. Hence while there have undeniably been progress being made towards women’s emancipation, it is legitimate to ask whether supplementary strategies could be deployed so as to increase negotiating power of independent NGOs. It is the lack of women’s political participation in decision making and representation as equal partners to men which needs to be addressed. It is from this point of view that the far-sightedness of Khadijah’s struggle could be appreciated. On the other hand, we do not have to dismiss the approach of Fatimah Hashim as well as the NCWO that she contributed to establishing. No doubt, one should bear in mind that there is a price to pay for having more access to resources, information and influence within political structures. The antidote to authoritarianism should be the respect for the right to make choices and to be different. There is definitely more than a singular way to social change.   
 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 Azizah Mokhzani (1990), Fatimah Srikandi Sumber Inspirasi, Kuala Lumpur: Majlis Kebangsaan Pertubuhan Wanita Malaysia. 

Dancz, V.H. (1987), Women and Party Politics in Peninsular Malaysia, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

 

Firdaus Haji Abdullah (1997), ‘Khadijah Sidek’ in Biografi Tokoh Pilihan Malaysia edited by Abdullah Zakaria Ghazali and Aduan Haji Nawang, Kuala Lumpur: Penerbit Universiti Malaya, p. 52-64.

 

Kamilia Ibrahim (1998), ‘The Involvement of Malay Women in Politics and the Need for a Paradigm Shift’ in Malaysian Women in the Wake of Change edited by Sharifah Zaleha Syed Hassan, Kuala Lumpur: University of Malaya, p. 105-110.

 

Khairdil bin Su’ut (2002), Biografi Khadijah Sidek, B.A. Academic Exercise for Session 2001/2002, Kuala Lumpur: Universiti Malaya History Department.

 

Khatijah Sidek (2001), Memoirs of Khatijah Sidek: Puteri Kesateria Bangsa, Bangi: Penerbit UKM.

 

Lai Suat Yan (2003), ‘The Women’s Movement in Peninsular Malaysia, 1900-99: A Historical Analysis’ in Social Movement in Malaysia: From Moral Communities to NGOs edited by Meredith L. Weiss and Saliha Hassan, London: Routledge Curzon, p. 45-74.

 

Malaysian Education Ministry (1995), ‘Khadijah Sidek’ in Ensiklopedia Sejarah dan Kebudayaan Melayu, Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, p.1236.

 

Manderson, Lenore (1978), Aspects of the Leadership of the Pergerakan Kaum Ibu UMNO Malaysia: The Sumatran Connection, Review of Indonesian and Malayan Affairs, 12:2, December, p. 17-42.

 

Manderson, Lenore (1980), Women, Politics, and Change: The Kaum Ibu UMNO, Malaysia, 1945-1972, Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press.

 

Martinez, Patricia A. (2003), ‘Complex Configurations: the Women’s Agenda for Change and the Women’s Candidacy Initiative’ in Social Movement in Malaysia: From Moral Communities to NGOs edited by Meredith L. Weiss and Saliha Hassan, London: Routledge Curzon, p.75-96.

 

Muhamad Rizal bin Yaacob (2002), Biografi Tan Sri Hajah Fatimah binti Haji Hashim, B.A. Academic Exercise for 2001/2002 Session, Kuala Lumpur: Universiti Malaya, History Department.

 

Ng, Cecilia and Chee Heng Leng (1999), ‘Women in Malaysia: Present Struggles and Future Directions’ in Positioning Women in Malaysia: Class and Gender in an Industrializing State edited by Cecilia Ng, London: Macmillan Press and New York: St. Martin’s Press.

 

NI, ‘Ibu Khatijah Sidek: Pejuang Nasionalis Wanita’, Nadi Insan, March 1980, p. 5-11.

 

Nik Safiah Karim dan Rokiah Talib (2003), Tan Sri Fatimah: Potret Seorang Pemimpin, Subang Jaya: Pelanduk Publications.

 

NSTP Research and Information Services (1994), Elections in Malaysia: facts and figures, Kuala Lumpur: New Straits Times Press.

 

Ong Aihwa (1999), Muslim Feminism: Citizenship in the shelter of Corporatist Islam, Citizenship Studies, 3:3, p. 355-371.

 Ramlah Adam (1980), Pergerakan Wanita Umno Malaysia 1945-1972: Satu Analisa, Malaysia Dari Segi Sejarah, No. 9, p. 26-54. 

Ramlah Adam (1991), Dr. Hamzah Hj. Taib (1900-1956), Malaysia Dari Segi Sejarah, No. 19, p. 1-17.

 

Ramlah Adam (1998), Khadijah Sidek, MASSA, Bil. 153, 29 Ogos, p.34.

 

Roff, William R. (1994), The Origins of Malay Nationalism, Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press.

 

Rohana Mohamed Nor (2003), Perjuangan Politik Khadijah Sidek, M.A. thesis for 2002/2003 Session, Kuala Lumpur: Universiti Malaya, History Department.

 

Tan Boon Kean and Bishan Singh (1994), Uneasy Relations: The State and NGOs in Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur: Gender and Development Programme, Asian and pacific Development Centre.

 

Taufik Abdullah (1971), Schools and Politics: The Kaum Muda Movement in West Sumatra (1927-1933), Ithaca, New York: Cornell Modern Indonesia Project.

 

UMNO, Pergerakan Kaum Ibu (1974), Buku Cenderamata Jubli Perak Wanita UMNO Malaysia Pada 25hb Ogos, Kuala Lumpur : Utusan Melayu (M) Berhad.

 

Wazir-jahan Karim (1983), Malay Women’s Movements: leadership and Processes of Change, International Social Science Journal, 35:98, p. 719-731.