As someone who followed closely the bitter dispute between Umno and People's Action Party (PAP) leaders, I had little doubt then that they had a hand in it.

I was then a trainee teacher. Like many Malay Singaporeans, I was a PAP sympathiser. I could empathise easily with the "Malaysian Malaysia" concept of equality for all.

But truth is always elusive. Which comes first, the chicken or the egg? Does fault lie with the person who throws the stone, or the person who provokes him? There are always two sides to a quarrel and it depends to some extent on who is relating the story.

As I recollect, the Umno standpoint was left to the hotheads to handle. Instead of a reasoned approach, they resorted to rhetoric, emotional outbursts and abuse. From the first round, they had lost the battle for the minds of the people. I suspect that the other side, for reasons of face and pride, felt inhibited in outlining their perspective in a rational and cogent manner.

Malays from Malaya have always possessed a strong sense of proprietary claim over the land. Under British rule, they had to share their homeland with other ethnic groups from near and far, and they feared that they could lose even that if the concept of "Malaysian Malaysia" took root.

It was like the re-run of the Malayan Union proposed by the British after World War II. The risks were too great for them. There was no way that the Malays could cope in a free-for-all competition for places in the universities, jobs, contracts and businesses.

As a result, the potent mix of racial rivalry and fear spilled into violence on the streets of Singapore on that fateful day in 1964. With the benefit of hindsight, I see the 1963-65 episode as basically a struggle between Malayan Malays and Chinese Singaporeans for influence and power in the enlarged Federation. Others, including the minority groups from both sides of the Causeway and the Sabahans and Sarawakians, were side players in this high-stakes political battle.

Substantial sections of the Chinese Malaysians who had earlier worked out their own understanding with the Malays preferred to ignore the PAP call for a more equal relationship among the races.

With emotions inflamed and invective filling the air, there was no possibility of a compromise. Even under the best of circumstances, "Malaysian Malaysia" could never have worked. I agree with the late Tunku Abdul Rahman that the ejection of Singapore from Malaysia was the only viable alternative. That was the best thing that happened for everybody, especially for the Malayan Malays and the Chinese Singaporeans. They were, and are, the main beneficiaries.

Without the PAP and the Chinese Singaporeans to contend with, the Malayan Malays succeeded within a generation -- thanks to the largesse of the New Economic Policy -- to become a progressive and developed community. With their survival secured, the pragmatic leaders of Umno mobilised their resilient minorities successfully in the cause of national development and making "Malaysia Boleh" more than just an empty slogan.

Therefore, I find it strange that Malaysian politicians and academics could regret the release of Singapore from the Federation. They should, instead, thank Mr Lee Kuan Yew and the PAP, as well as the late Tunku, for making it possible for them to translate their precarious political dominance to become, to borrow their own words, a "respected community". No matter what strategy they adopt, it is just foolish talk on their part to think that they could have subdued Singapore, without becoming mired in endless strife.

The Chinese Singaporeans, too, have done as well or better. In the absence of racial bickerings, and left in peace to pursue their dreams, they have, under the dynamic leadership of the PAP, turned Singapore into a great success story. Everybody, including Malay Singaporeans, has a place under its umbrella, basking in its prosperity and assured of its stake in the future of Singapore. It is clear that they have not done that badly, despite lagging behind the other ethnic groups on so many fronts, from educational achievements to economic participation. I leave it to the Chinese Malaysians to assess how they have fared since the separation.

As a member of a minority group myself, I have no difficulty in empathising with their status and their problems.

Yet there is no denying that they, too, have been able to find a place under the Malaysian sun and have reaped the benefits brought about by the many years of economic growth, political stability and racial harmony. It is ironical that such a far-sighted solution that resulted in gains all round should lead to periodic acrimony between the leaders of the two countries.

[The writer, a former Straits Times correspondent in Malaysia, is special assistant to the CEO of Mendaki. The views expressed in this article, which he contributed to The Straits Times, are his own.]