# data[].attributes.body
From source A I can infer that the separation of Singapore from Malaysia was due to political differences.

The evidence from the source to support my inference “ Considering that Singapore (and the PAP) was predominantly Chinese,there was the perception that the inclusion of Singapore into the Malaysian Federation would dilute the power of the always and increase the influence of the Chinese.Actions by both parties only  served to worsen the acrimonious relations between Singapore and Malaysia.”

The evidence showed that Malaysia was bias towards the Malays. As Singapore was made up of mainly Chinese , there was a belief that the Chinese would weaken the power of the Malays.

The fact that the Malays were treated better than the Chinese and the fact that UMNO were unhappy with the  Chinese influence in Malaysia, resulted in racial riots.To prevent the situation from developing even further, it was decided that, it would be best for Singapore to separate from Malaysia.

Therefore, I can infer that the separation was due to the fact that the Malays were favoured, and the fact that the races in Singapore were unhappy that they were treated below the Malays, it was decided that separation would be best for both countries.

From source B, I can also infer that the separation was also due to economic difficulties.

The evidence from the source to support my inference is"On the economic front, the common market of Peninsular Malaysia and Singapore did not materialise since they could not agree on anything. In November 1964, the then Malaysian Finance Minister Tan Siew Sin proposed raising an extra RM147 million in taxes.This could have led to Singapore  contributing more than 35 per cent towards the federal budget

”

This shows that the split between Malaysia and Singapore was also due to economic differences as Singapore would have to contribute more towards taxes. Further more, the common market that they had thought of before the merger did not come about.

As Singapore were now made to pay more in taxes and the common market did not come about, there were no industrialisation and economical growth, and only economical downfall for Singapore.

Therefore, I can infer that The split between Singapore and Malaysia was also due to economical downfall after that the merger brought about.

# data[].attributes.body
From Source A, I can infer that Singaore left Malaysia due to political differences with each other.

The evidence is, "Singapore's PAP advocated a meritocratic, non-communal form of government that sought to treat everyone equally and reward them based on their merit, rather than their race or religion. Such a belief was expressed through our pledge, for example. The dominant political party in the Malayan penisula on the other had believed that the Malays, being the "sons of the soil", deserved special privileges over the Chinese and Indians.”

The evidence shows that the PAP wanted to give everyone the same fair share of rights. No matter if you’re Chinese, Malay, Indian, Eurasian living at that time, all of us is treated equally and not according to our races or religion. However, Malaysia did not agree to the PAP as they believed that they are the owners of the land and they should be respected more than the other races. To them, the malays control Malaya and should have more rights and respect than the other people of Malaya, which then anger PAP and the people of Singapore which were mostly made up of Chinese at that point of time.

# data[].attributes.body
From the source, I can infer that Singapore left Malaya due to the disagreement on having the common market.

The evidence is "Economically, the lack of progress in establishing a common market also served to dilute the appeal of a union with Malaysia. As a resource-poor, economically undeveloped territory, the leaders felt that union with Malaysia was the best outcome for the survival of the state.  One of the main benefits would be to gain access to a larger consumer base to sell their goods to. However, by 1965, progress on this common market had stalled.".

This shows me that

# data[].attributes.body
From Source A I can infer that Singapore separated from Malaya due to being unable to come to a consensus for a common market.

This is supported by 'Economically, the lack of progress in establishing a common market also served to dilute the appeal of a union with Malaysia. As a resource-poor, Economically undeveloped territory, the leaders felt that union with Malaysia was the best outcome for the survival of the state.

# data[].attributes.body
From Source A, I can infer that Singapore left Malaya due to the inability to come a consensus for a common market.

This is supported by "Economically, the lack of progress in establishing a common market also served to dilute the appeal of a union with Malaysia. As a resource-poor, economically undeveloped territory, the leaders felt that union with Malaysia was the best outcome for the survival of the state.  One of the main benefits would be to gain access to a larger consumer base to sell their goods to. However, by 1965, progress on this common market had stalled."

The source showed that Singapore had ultimately wanted to merger with Malaysia to create a common market with Malaysia since they had the lack of materials and was not stable economically. At the same time, the products made in Singapore was supposed to ensure that with the merger of Malaya & Singapore, the products can be sold to more markets. However, Malaysia did not carry out this, which resulted in the lack of progression in creating a common market which had led to Singapore separating from Malaya.

# data[].attributes.body
From source A, I can infer that the separation of Singapore and Malaya was due to differing views on racial policies.

The evidence is “ Singapore's PAP advocated a meritocratic, non-communal form of government that sought to treat everyone equally and reward them based on their merit, rather than their race or religion. Such a belief was expressed through our pledge, for example. The dominant political party in the Malayan peninsula on the other had believed that the Malays, being the "sons of the soil", deserved special privileges over the Chinese and Indians “

The evidence shows that the difference in racial policy practices by leaders of both states led to the separation of both states. While Singapore’s PAP was not biased and treated and rewarded everyone according to their effort. However, the Malayan leaders on the other hand believed in Malays being the special race in the states and deserved to have special treatments compared to the Chinese and indians. Both views contradicted each other, thus resulting in the separation of Singapore and Malaya.

From Source A, I can also infer that the Separation of Singapore and Malaya was due to the economic differences.

The evidence is"Economically, the lack of progress in establishing a common market also served to dilute the appeal of a union with Malaysia. As a resource-poor, economically undeveloped territory, the leaders felt that union with Malaysia was the best outcome for the survival of the state.  One of the main benefits would be to gain access to a larger consumer base to sell their goods to. However, by 1965, progress on this common market had stalled. Thus, our economic impetus for joining up slowly faltered.”

The setting up of a common market was one of the main reasons for the merger in the first place. However, the setting up of a common market after merger was troubled due to major differences. One of these major problems included slow progress of Singapore industries being granted pioneer status. The slow progress of the integration of Singapore and Malaya into a common market was thus a reason for the separation of Singapore and Malaya.

# data[].attributes.body
From Source A, I can infer that Singapore left Malaya due to political differences and disagreement with each other.
The evidence supporting my point is "Singapore's PAP advocated a meritocratic, non-communal form of government that sought to treat everyone equally and reward them based on their merit, rather than their race or religion. Such a belief was expressed through our pledge, for example. The dominant political party in the Malayan penisula on the other had believed that the Malays, being the "sons of the soil", deserved special privileges over the Chinese and Indians. "

The evidence tells me that the government from both countries have difference in political view. Their  political views contradict each other as Malaysia felt that the Malays have special privileges over the Chinese and Indians, while Singapore felt that the country should have a non-communal form of government that sought to treat everyone equally and reward them based on their merit, rather than their race or religion. The difference in political view would cause tensions between the countries and the people of both countries will feel that their government is unstable, thus they needed to separate.

From source B, I can infer that Singapore separated from Malaysia due to economical unfairness.

The evidence supporting my point is "Furthermore, the proposed turnover and payroll tax would seriously affect businessmen in Singapore. The Malaysian Finance Minister also wanted to increase the contribution of Singapore to the federal government from 40 to 60 per cent of its revenue."

From the evidence, I can infer that instead of helping and supporting Singapore, Malaysia is taking advantage of Singapore, making Singapore pay a high percentage of its revenue. Malaysia instead of treating Singapore as part of the country, is treating them as a source for extra money, allowing the rest of Malaysia to prosper without Singapore. Thus, Singapore felt that it would be better if they separated from Malaysia.

# data[].attributes.body
From the source i can infer that separation was caused due to intense disagreement between Singapore and Malaysian Leaders.

The evidence is "The difficulty in getting pioneer status from Kuala Lumper for Singapore Industries frustrated Singapore leaders", and "At the heart of the rift was Lee's multi-racial slogan, "Malaysian Malaysia", which sowed deep distrust among UMNO leaders".

Thus i can infer that it was due to disagreements over equal status and multiracialism that caused Singapore to leave the merger. Malayan Leaders refused Singapore's industries to gain citizenship and sovereignty from Malaya, still treating them as equal as "migrants", unequal in status although the merger was agreed and they were residing in Malaysian soil. Secondly was the racial issues. Lee Kwan Yew wanted a multi racial country, where all races were treated as kin. But Malayan leaders preferred Malay dominance over others, favouring the Malays to gain better privilege over the rest. Hence it was because of these two issues that stifled the success of Merger.

# data[].attributes.body
From source A, I can infer that the difference in the political belief of the government of Singapore and Malaya lead to Singapore leaving Malaya. The evidence from the source is "Firstly, in the political sphere, our modes of governance differed greatly." The Singapore government, PAP, believed in meritocracy and non-communal equality for all. However, the Malaysian government, UNMO, believed in giving the Malays better privileges over the other races. It was thought that Singapore into the Malaysia would weaken the power of the Malays and increase the influence of the Chinese. Thus, there wasn't a good relationship, causing Singapore to leave Malaya.

Form source B, Singapore left because of economical problems. The evidence from the source is "On the economic front, the common market of Peninsular Malaysia and Singapore did not materialise since they could not agree on anything." The Malaysian Finance Minister proposed raising an extra RM147 million in taxes, which will seriously affect businessmen in Singapore. The Malaysian Finance Minister also wanted to increase the revenue of Singapore to the federal government from 40 to 60 per cent. The would reduce the rate at which the Singapore's economy grow. Thus, Singapore left Malaya because Malaya was requesting for too much of Singapore's economy

# data[].attributes.body
From source A, I can infer that Singapore left Malaya due to political differences. This can be supported by "Singapore's PAP advocated a meritocratic, non-communal form of government that sought to treat everyone equally and reward them based on their merit, rather than their race or religion." and "The dominant political party in the Malayan penisula on the other had believed that the Malays, being the 'sons of the soil', deserved special privileges over the Chinese and Indians." As seen from the evidence, Singapore's leading party wanted a multiracial society where people advanced through the levels with wit, not race. Meanwhile, Malaya's leading parties advocated a country where the Malays had priority, where Malays will get more privileges. The leaders of both leading political parties recognised that there was no common agreement between the parties, and this will not be of any benefit to both countries. As such, Singapore left Malaya before the already deteriorating situation became worse.

From source A, I can also infer that Singapore left Malaya due to economic differences. This is supported by "One of the main benefits would be to gain access to a larger consumer base to sell their goods to. However, by 1965, progress on this common market had stalled. Thus, our economic impetus for joining up slowly faltered." As seen from the evidence, Singapore decided to merge with Malaya so that it could develop its economy with help from the benefits of a common market. However, with Malaya demanding unreasonable payouts from Singapore, and Malaya's repeated failures to agree on the common market with Singapore, Singapore political leaders felt that the merger with Malaya did not bring about any economical benefits at all. The current situation will only serve to satisfy the needs of the Malayan political parties, and will limit Singapore's ability to prosper, as such, Singapore left Malaya.

# data[].attributes.body
from the source, I can infer that Singapore left malaya because of economical instability.

# data[].attributes.body
From the source A, I can infer that Singapore left Malaya due to different political views between the political leaders of Singapore and Malaya. This is supported by, 'Singapore's PAP advocated a meritocratic, non-communal form of government that sought to treat everyone equally and reward them based on their merit, rather than their race or religion. Such a belief was expressed through our pledge, for example.' and, 'The dominant political party in the Malayan peninsula on the other hand believed that the Malays, being the "sons of the soil", deserved special privileges over the Chinese and Indians.' From this evidence, it shows that the Singapore and Malayan leaders had a difference as the Singapore leaders sought for equality between the different races but the Malayan leaders wanted to get a special treatment if they are Malay, which is a pro-race country. This contradicts each other which destabilises the country. Thus, it is better for them to separate.

From the source B, I can also infer that Singapore left Malaya due to economical differences. This is supported by, 'Furthermore, the proposed turnover and payroll tax would seriously affect businessmen in Singapore. The Malaysian Finance Minister also wanted to increase the contribution of Singapore to the federal government from 40 to 60 per cent of its revenue. In addition, there were increasing tension and differences between the People's Action Party leaders in Singapore and the leaders in the Malaysian central government.' Therefore, both countries did not benefit as much as they had expected from their common market and would better be off without it. Malaya takes a lot of the revenue that Singapore takes and at the same time Malaya does not benefit from Singapore due to the tension between both countries.

# data[].attributes.body
From Source A, I can infer that Singapore left Malaya due to the differences in political views. This is supported by "Singapore's PAP advocated a meritocratic, non-communal form of government that sought to treat everyone equally and reward them based on their merit, rather than their race or religion." and "The dominant political party in the Malayan Peninsular on the other had believed that the Malays, being the "sons of the soil", deserved special privileges over the Chinese and Indians." PAP wanted Malaysia to be a fair country where everyone had equal rights and opportunities in their lives. However, UMNO, the leading political party in Malaysia, felt that the Malays deserved specialised treatment being the original race in Malaysia. This issue resulted in many racial riots between the Malays and Chinese in Singapore. Due to the political differences, the only way to resolve the conflict was for Singapore to leave Malaya. This allowed both Singapore and Malaysia to have their own political preferences. Therefore, Singapore left Malaya because of the opposing political preferences.

From Source B, I can infer that Singapore left Malaya due to the disagreements in economical issues. This is supported by "On the economic front, the common market of Peninsular Malaysia and Singapore did not materialise since they could not agree on anything." The Malaysian Finance Minister of that time had wanted to raise RM 147 million in taxes. This would cause Singapore to have to contribute more to Malaysia. Singapore's contribution to Malaysia had to be increased

# data[].attributes.body
From Source A, I can infer that Singapore left Malaya due to their differing political views.

This is supported by "... in the political sphere, our modes of governance differed greatly. Singapore's PAP advocated a meritocratic, non-communal form of government that sought to treat everyone equally and reward them based on their merit, rather than their race or religion" and  "The political parties at that time, (UMNO, MIC, MCA) were largely based on race, with the Malay-based party, UMNO being the biggest and strongest. Considering that Singapore (and the PAP) was predominantly Chinese, there was the perception that the inclusion of Singapore into the Malaysian Federation would dilute the power of the Malays and increase the influence of the Chinese."

The Malay government believed in a pro-race government, which meant that

# data[].attributes.body
From the source A, I can infer that Singapore left Malaya due to conflicts in political views.

The evidence is "The political parties at that time, (UMNO, MIC, MCA) were largely based on race, with the Malay-based party, UMNO being the biggest and strongest." and, " Considering that Singapore(and the PAP) was predominantly Chinese, there was the perception that the inclusion of Singapore into the Malaysian Federation would dilute the power of the Malays and increase the influence of the Chinese." and also, " Actions by both parties only served to worsen the acrimonious relations between Singapore and Malaysia."

From the evidence, I can infer that in both countries, the political parties are made are by two large groups of different races. Thus in the two political party one of them had a mentality of multi racialism while the political party in Malaysia has a large base of Malaysian, they support the Malaysians pro race. Thus the political views on both parties contradict each other thus causing the separation.

--------------------------------------------------

From source B, I can also infer that Singapore left Malaysia due to disagreement on economic issues.

The evidence is, "On the economic front, the common market of Peninsular Malaysia and Singapore did not materialise since they could not agree on anything." and, "In November 1964, the then Malaysian Finance Minister Tan Siew Sin proposed raising an extra RM147 million in taxes."

From the evidence, I can infer that back in 1964 Malaysia wanted to improve the economy of Malaysia relying on the base of the economy that Singapore already has but was not willing to support to improve the economic of Singapore as what was agreed back then during the signing of merging. The common market once agreed during the merging was planned to help the both countries. But Malaysia disregarded the common market, thus Singapore wanting to build up the economy wanted to separate from Malaysia In which this caused the difference in view economically for both Singapore and Malaysia.

# data[].attributes.body
From source A, I can infer that Singapore left Malaysia due to racial differences which affects the countries politically. This is supported by "The political parties at that time, (UMNO, MIC, MCA) were largely based on race, with the Malay-based party, UMNO being the biggest and strongest. Considering that Singapore(and the PAP) was predominantly Chinese, there was the perception that the inclusion of Singapore into the Malaysian Federation would dilute the power of the Malays and increase the influence of the Chinese." The evidence tells me that the parties, one being chinese-dominant and the other being malay-dominant, will eventually lead to racism and accusation within the parties. this racism will lead to the public fighting too and causing riots and no peace. thus, a separation is needed to stop the racial disputes.
From source B, I can infer that Singapore left due to economical problems. The evidence supporting this is "On the economic front, the common market of Peninsular Malaysia and Singapore did not materialise since they could not agree on anything." this evidence shows thatg

# data[].attributes.body
Singapore left Malaya due to conflicting views to wether Malays should be given special rights.

From " PAP advocated a meritocratic,non-communal form of government that sought to treat everyone equally and reward them based on their merit ,rather than their race or religion. "and " The dominant political party in the Malayan penisula on the other had believed that the Malays, being the "sons of the soil", deserved special privileges over the Chinese and Indians. "

This shows a disagreement between the 2 governments whom each had their own beliefs , PAP believes in a fair and equal society where everyone is rewarded based on their achievements rather than their race. The disagreement had bring about multiple problems between the 2 states and could have brought up riots and other fights thus Singapore left Malaya to prevent such events from happening.

Another reason why Singapore left Malaya was due to the inability to create policies that are agreeable to create a common market whic led to an economical slow down

From" Economically, the lack of progress in establishing a common market also served to dilute the appeal of a union with Malaysia. As a resource-poor, economically undeveloped territory, the leaders felt that union with Malaysia was the best outcome for the survival of the state.  One of the main benefits would be to gain access to a larger consumer base to sell their goods to. However, by 1965, progress on this common market had stalled. Thus, our economic impetus for joining up slowly faltered."

Due to the failure and slow development of the common market,the 2 states were unable to do trade properly thus leading to an economic slow down which let Singapore to leave Malaya.

# data[].attributes.body
From source B, I can infer that Singapore left Malaya due to the costs in the agreement signed. "Singapore contributing more than 35 per cent towards the federal budget, although the Singapore population comprised only about 17 per cent of the whole population in Malaysia at that time.The Malaysian Finance Minister also wanted to increase the contribution of Singapore to the federal government from 40 to 60 per cent of its revenue." shows this. The evidence shows that even though Singapore's population was less than half of Malaya's, they were paying about 35% of Malaya's federal budget, paying 40-60% of their revenue.

From source A, I can infer that Singapore separated from Malaya due to the difference in political views and ideologies. " Singapore's PAP advocated a meritocratic, non-communal form of government that sought to treat everyone equally and reward them based on their merit, rather than their race or religion. The dominant political party in the Malayan penisula on the other had believed that the Malays, being the "sons of the soil", deserved special privileges over the Chinese and Indians." This shows that Singapore rewarded based off merit but Malaya was biased towards a certain race. As the views were contradicting each other, Singapore separated from Malaya.

# data[].attributes.body
Source A:
From the source, I can infer that Singapore separated from Malaysia due to the disagreement in political ideologies.

This is supported by "Singapore's PAP advocated a meritocratic, non-communal form of government that sought to treat everyone equally and reward them based on their merit, rather than their race or religion. Such a belief was expressed through our pledge, for example. The dominant political party in the Malayan penisula on the other had believed that the Malays, being the "sons of the soil", deserved special privileges over the Chinese and Indians."

The majority of Singapore's PAP members are Chinese while the Malaysia's UMNO members are mostly Malays. They had a disagreement about the racial policies as Singapore wanted Malaysia to be fair and treat the races equally but Malaysia believed that the Malays deserved special privileges over the other races and thus they had a dispute over the way things were run in the country as they did not see eye to eye.

From the source, I can infer that Singapore separated from Malaysia due to economic differences.

This is supported by "Economically, the lack of progress in establishing a common market also served to dilute the appeal of a union with Malaysia. As a resource-poor, economically undeveloped territory, the leaders felt that union with Malaysia was the best outcome for the survival of the state.  One of the main benefits would be to gain access to a larger consumer base to sell their goods to. However, by 1965, progress on this common market had stalled. Thus, our economic impetus for joining up slowly faltered."

Common market failure and tax revenue proportions to be given

# data[].attributes.body
From the source, I can infer that Singapore left Malaya because of political difference.

This is supported by," Singapore's PAP advocated a meritocratic, non-communal form of government that sought to treat everyone equally and reward them based on their merit, rather than their race or religion. " and "The dominant political party in the Malayan peninsula on the other had believed that the Malays, being the "sons of the soil", deserved special privileges over the Chinese and Indians. This resulted essentially in the government practicing a heavily pro-Malay affirmative action policy, in a bid to bring them up to the economic levels of the Chinese. "

Malaya support and favour Malays more as the it is their main races. Malaya expected Singapore to follow these ideologies but it contradicts Singapore's political ideologies on being a multi-cultural society due to the fact that there are many races in Singapore. This would thus create tensions between both governments as Singapore might face racial riots due to favouring one race. Hence Singapore left Malaya because they thought it was best for the country to remain united due to the political differences.

From the source I can infer that Singapore left

# data[].attributes.body
From the source, I can infer that

# data[].attributes.body
From Source A, I can infer that Singapore left Malaya due to the difference in political ideals. The evidence for Source A is "Singapore's PAP advocated a meritocratic, non-communal form of government that sought to treat everyone equally and reward them based on their merit, rather than their race or religion." and "The dominant political party in the Malayan peninsula on the other had believed that the Malays, being the "sons of the soil", deserved special privileges over the Chinese and Indians." The above evidence shows the conflicting and different ideologies in terms of political ideologies. As can be seen, the Singaporean government promoted equality notwithstanding their race or religion, while the Malayan government wanted to remain having Malay dominance in Malaya. This shows that the two parties had conflicting ideologies. With this contradiction between the two ideologies the two countries, it resulted in various tensions between the political parties and the differences within the races of the people led to racial riots. Therefore, I can infer from Source A that Singapore left Malaya due to the difference in political ideologies.

I can also infer from Source B that Singapore left Malaya due to the economical unfairness towards Singapore. The evidence is "In November 1964, the then Malaysian Finance Minister Tan Siew Sin proposed raising an extra RM147 million in taxes. This could have led to Singapore  contributing more than 35 per cent towards the federal budget, although the Singapore population comprised only about 17 per cent of the whole population in Malaysia at that time. Furthermore, the proposed turnover and payroll tax would seriously affect businessmen in Singapore." The above evidence shows how the Malaysian government wanted the Singaporean population to pay an increased amount of taxes even though they populated less that 20 per cent of the country. This shows the imbalance and unfairness economically towards Singapore that Malaysia showed that would no doubt hurt or cripple Singapore's economy. Such a situation would allowed Malaysia to advance forward while leaving Singapore far behind economically speaking. Henceforth, Singapore left Malaya due to the extreme economical unfairness and imbalance.

# data[].attributes.body
On the economic front, the common market of Peninsular Malaysia and Singapore did not materialise since they could not agree on anything.

In November 1964, the then Malaysian Finance Minister Tan Siew Sin proposed raising an extra RM147 million in taxes.

This could have led to Singapore  contributing more than 35 per cent towards the federal budget, although the Singapore population comprised only about 17 per cent of the whole population in Malaysia at that time.

Furthermore, the proposed turnover and payroll tax would seriously affect businessmen in Singapore. The Malaysian Finance Minister also wanted to increase the contribution of Singapore to the federal government from 40 to 60 per cent of its revenue.

In addition, there were increasing tension and differences between the People's Action Party leaders in Singapore and the leaders in the Malaysian central government.

Malaysian Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman wrote to Dr Goh Keng Swee and offered Singapore full autonomy, except in foreign and defence matters, in exchange for Singapore giving up its seats in the Federal Parliament.

At that time, Mr Lee advocated a "Malaysian Malaysia" which had upset certain Malaysian UMNO leaders.

# data[].attributes.body
Firstly, in the political sphere, our modes of governace differed greatly. Singapore's PAP advocated a meritocratic, non-communal form of government that sought to treat everyone equally and reward them based on their merit, rather than their race or religion. Such a belief was expressed through our pledge, for example. The dominant political party in the Malayan penisula on the other had believed that the Malays, being the "sons of the soil", deserved special privileges over the Chinese and Indians. This resulted essentially in the government practicing a heavily pro-Malay affirmative action policy, in a bid to bring them up to the economic levels of the Chinese. The political parties at that time, (UMNO, MIC, MCA) were largely based on race, with the Malay-based party, UMNO being the biggest and strongest. Considering that Singapore(and the PAP) was predominantly Chinese, there was the perception that the inclusion of Singapore into the Malaysian Federation would dilute the power of the Malays and increase the influence of the Chinese. Actions by both parties only served to worsen the acrimonious relations between Singapore and Malaysia.

Economically, the lack of progress in establishing a common market also served to dilute the appeal of a union with Malaysia. As a resource-poor, economically undeveloped territory, the leaders felt that union with Malaysia was the best outcome for the survival of the state.  One of the main benefits would be to gain access to a larger consumer base to sell their goods to. However, by 1965, progress on this common market had stalled. Thus, our economic impetus for joining up slowly faltered.

With the racial riots in 1964-5 between the Chinese and the Malays, leaders of both countries felt that the situation could not continue. It was best to split before it broke down furthur. As a result, 48 years ago on 9th August, Singapore declared their independence.

As for whether the possibility of joining up once again exists, the chances of that happening in the near future are miniscule. Our paths since then have only diverged further. The reasons for our union in the first place have either disappeared or diminished in intensity.  Thus I doubt that we would want to reunite with Malaysia.