According to Mr Lee, it is also an account of incidents which have shaped his life. He said those incidents have also influenced the history of Singapore.

The book is none other than a record of his personal views and experiences, based on his memory and records, regarding the incidents he has been through.

We can agree, or not agree, with his views, but it is his right to state his opinions and his perceptions of his experiences.

The late Tunku Abdul Rahman once contributed articles to a Malaysian English daily, which were later put together in a book called "Looking Back".

The Tunku's book also contained chapters on Singapore's merger with Malaysia, the "Malaysian Malaysia" issue during which Mr Lee and his party were active in this country's politics, and Singapore's separation from Malaysia.

The book spoke a lot about Mr Lee condemning and criticising him. But the Tunku's book was his personal perception and opinion of Mr Lee, and it was his right to state his views.

It is customary that when important leaders like Mr Lee and the Tunku, who were involved directly in incidents of history, speak of these events, their perceptions will be controversial.

To be fair to Mr Lee, from the quotes from his memoirs which I have read in our media so far, his comments on past incidents relating to Singapore and Malaysia ties are moderate. There may be sensitive sections in his book, such as when he said Malaysia used the issue of water supply to intimidate and "bully" Singapore.

According to Mr Lee, the Tunku told the British High Commissioner that if Singapore implemented policies which affected Malaysia's interest, Malaysia would shut the water supply to Singapore.

His views that Malaysian leaders like to have fun and gather wealth, that Umno instigated the Singapore Malays to riot in 1964 -- all these are his own personal perceptions and views, as the Prime Minister of Singapore between 1959 and 1990.

As a journalist who was rather close to the country's leaders at that time, I doubt Mr Lee's claim that the Tunku intended to use the issue of water supply to threaten Singapore if Singapore's foreign policies affected Malaysia's interests. Could the generous, loving and humane Tunku do so?

As far as I remember, during the era covered in Mr Lee's book, the neighbouring countries which received more attention from Malaysian leaders were Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines.

Malaysian leaders were concerned with Indonesia, because they did not want Indonesia being led or influenced by Sukarno-era policies.

With Thailand, we were careful because our northern border had become a hideout for communist terrorists, and we needed Bangkok's cooperation to tackle the threat.

With the Philippines, we faced diplomatic difficulties, following the Philippine's claim over Sabah.

Although there were problems with Singapore at that time, Malaysia did not see them as capable of affecting Malaysia's political, economic and security interests.

Singapore implemented her own policies, building the nation and strengthening her sovereignty after separating from Malaysia.

There have been suggestions that Mr Lee's book be banned in Malaysia. I personally do not agree that it should be banned, merely because it was written by a big leader who has succeeded in building a new nation which stands as our neighbour.

He has the right to his opinions on the incidents he once went through. His views are part of history, not only for Singapore, but also for us.

[The writer is a veteran journalist and former Umno member. He contributed this comment to the Berita Harian (Malaysia).]