Sarawak’s position, vision for future

ALMOST two weeks ago, Premier Datuk Patinggi Tan Sri Abang Johari Tun Openg was invited as a guest star for the special Sarawak Day episode of the Keluar Sekejap (KS) Podcast.

This popular podcast is hosted by former Health Minister Khairy Jamaluddin, who also serves as the chief curator and podcaster.

The show, which has over 331,000 subscriptions on YouTube and is also available on Spotify and Apple Podcasts, featured its 115th episode co-hosted with former UMNO Information Chief Shahril Hamdan.

During this special episode, they discussed several important topics, particularly regarding Sarawak’s position within Malaysia and the latest developments in the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) claims.

The conversation also delved into Sarawak’s mission, vision, and development direction, as well as the future of Sarawak’s politics.

Key topics included Abang Johari’s political journey, Sarawak’s position within Malaysia, the progress of MA63 claims, developments in the oil and gas industry, efforts to become a global renewable energy player, Abang Johari’s economic philosophy, and free education for local children.

Additionally, the episode addressed the direction of the Gabungan Parti Sarawak (GPS) as a potential “kingmaker” in national politics, future plans, the 13th State Election (PRN), electoral boundary redelineation, and Sarawak’s geopolitical landscape.

Within 24 hours of its release on YouTube, the podcast episode had garnered 186,094 views, with nearly all viewers leaving positive comments, impressed by the vision and forward-thinking of Sarawak’s top leader.

As of now, the episode has reached over 500,000 views, and clips from the interview have also gone viral on other social media platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok.

Khairy: Last year at KS, we had the honour of inviting the Governor of Sarawak, Tun Pehin Sri Dr Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar, who was then the President of the Senate, as our special guest. This year, I believe our political guest can be regarded as ‘the number one Supremo’ not just in Sarawak but in all of Malaysia, and we will delve into why. It is my pleasure to extend a warm welcome to Premier Datuk Patinggi Tan Sri Abang Johari Tun Openg to Keluar Sekejap.

Abang Johari: Thank you for inviting me.

Khairy: How are you, Datuk Patinggi?

Abang Johari: Alhamdulillah, I’m in good health.

Khairy: Here at KS, when we have a special guest, especially a political figure, we like to start with their personal journey. In a typical podcast or interview with the Premier, such questions might rarely be asked. So, we want to begin with your personal political story, as many are unaware that the Premier entered politics in the late ’70s. If I’m not mistaken, you became the Youth Chief of Parti Pesaka Bumiputera Bersatu (PBB) around 1977 and won a seat in the Sarawak State Legislative Assembly (DUN) in 1981. At that time, I was five years old, and Shahril hadn’t been born yet.

Shahril: Yes, not yet.

Khairy: Subsequently, the Premier has won more than 10 or 11 terms in the DUN. However, the journey to becoming the Premier of Sarawak was not easy. Perhaps you could share with us how long it took?

Abang Johari: There are many stories, actually. When I entered the political arena in 1977, 1978, and 1979, our community was divided because there was a new Malay-led party called PAJAR (Parti Anak Jati Sarawak). At that time, we felt that the Bumiputera people, especially the Malays, needed to unite, and if we were fragmented, we would become weak. During that period, I was a committee member of the village surau, and even there, divisions were evident. That’s why I believed that PBB was the strong party that needed support, so I helped it. That’s when I was elected Deputy Youth Chief, and eventually, I became deeply involved and supported PBB up to this day. The ultimate aim was to unite the people, and with this unity, we could develop the spirit to help the community under our care to collectively elevate their positions in this era of development. That’s why I have endured for so long, because our intention was to unite the community, not only among the Bumiputera but also including the non-Bumiputera.

Khairy: The late former Governor of Sarawak, Tun Datuk Abang Openg, was your father. Was politics already in your blood?

Abang Johari: Looking at our background, our family has indeed played a role in administration from the time of the Brunei Sultanate, through the British Colony, to the formation of Malaysia. This is partly by chance, as it is based on the community’s trust in us. So, if we have this strength and advantage, why not contribute in terms of leadership? Ultimately, the main objective is to serve, that’s all. There are no significant personal interests. That was our objective.

Shahril: The Premier mentioned that the ultimate aims are unity and service. But from a young age, what was your burning desire for Sarawak and its people?

Abang Johari: On July 22, we must consider the Nine Cardinal Principles and the Sarawak Constitution of 1941, where the Brooke family handed over power to the people of Sarawak to develop it on their own. In this context, I believe that, like any country, we want to develop this state in all circumstances so that the people can live in peace and prosperity, continuing their lives. That is what we aim for.

Shahril: To continue a bit with the personal story, Khairy Jamaluddin mentioned the late father of the Premier. Some might cynically say that the Premier had advantages and that your political journey was easier. But from our understanding, it wasn’t that simple. Perhaps the Premier could share a bit about the challenges and struggles.

Abang Johari: Yes, we don’t rely on our background. We must rely on merit and what we can contribute in the process of serving the people. It’s not easy to maintain a position; it’s actually not necessary. The people will defend you if your contributions are good. However, if the contributions are not good, the people can also replace you. So, we return to the objective and contribution to society, and perhaps that’s why I’ve endured. First, we must be loyal; second, we must have ideas that can elevate people’s lives; and third, we must be in a stable position to move forward. If there are problems, we focus on solving them. This is what needs to be emphasised.

Khairy: Perhaps Shahril and I want to take a lesson from the Premier’s experience, since I was expelled from the party and Shahril was suspended by the same party. We want to find a formula for patience like the Premier has shown. Being appointed as a minister for the first time in 1987 as the Minister of Industrial Development, you waited 30 years to become Chief Minister. As mentioned earlier, the journey was not a straightforward ascent. I think many listeners and viewers, especially the youth, might not know these details. For example, the Premier might not mention it, but I will. You won the position of Deputy President of PBB, but when it came time for the transition of Chief Minister from the late Tun Pehin Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud (Tun Taib) to the late Pehin Sri Adenan Satem (Tok Nan), and you were bypassed, how did you continue?

Abang Johari: Actually, I was already in the cabinet in 1983 as a junior minister. My political journey has been shaped by being elected by PBB members, from youth leader to deputy leader and beyond, and you rise in the party as the leadership observes you. Even though I was not chosen to replace Tun Taib, to me, the rank is one thing. The main thing is to respect and be loyal to the leadership and the party, because we are not obsessed with positions. That was my experience. Although we had supporters who asked why I wasn’t challenging, I believed in serving and working because, in the end, it is God who decides. Eventually, I was entrusted with the role after Tok Nan’s passing. Tun Taib asked why I didn’t take over, and with the support from party colleagues and component parties, I worked with the trust given. Patience is essential because, in the end, it’s up to you and how you serve. To me, a position is just one thing. At that time, I went from being Minister of Industry to the Ministry of Tourism, where I transformed tourism. Then I was given the Ministry of Housing, which had some issues, but I worked on it, including revitalising Sibu Jaya, which was almost a dead town. Now it’s a vibrant town. This included policies to help provide housing for the people. So, you can be first, second, or third, but contribute whatever you can.

Khairy: It’s still related to how you manage these situations because this is very interesting from a political and career perspective. For example, when the transition of power happened from Tun Taib to Tok Nan, people might say it was a sign that one was a favourite. However, the Premier’s support within the party remained strong despite some signals from above not being entirely favourable. How did the Premier manage to maintain that support even though there were possibly different signals?

Abang Johari: The key is trust because people trust you. The public and party members will ask, “Why not?” Whatever happens, you still serve because it’s clear that we’re not fighting for ourselves. That’s fundamental. If it were for personal gain, it would be different. I think this is the basis of any struggle. That’s my character. Some people also ask why I remain silent, and I say no, no. For me, the people and the party are more important than myself. If the party fractures, what happens? Secondly, the party leadership also understands. I must state that the late Tun Taib also had wisdom; he did not remove me. It’s also about the leadership’s understanding. If the top leadership doesn’t understand our struggle, they might say you should leave. It depends on how well they understand.

Shahril: Premier, you yourself mentioned that the leadership also has its wisdom. The question is, how did you manage to handle the situation, which was clearly ‘in cold storage’ and reduce the anger or discontent? What political art can be shared?

Abang Johari: You have to remember I have a long background too. Tun Taib also had a long background in politics, and initially, we worked as a team. He might have had his reasons. He said to let Tok Nan go first, and perhaps me later. He knew better, and when Tok Nan passed away, Tun Taib called me and said, ‘Now can you lead with support from the party components?’ Because in Sarawak, we develop as a team, so I believe that culture was established. If it’s a team, the captain and the support must be aligned, and it must move together. Otherwise, it’s not a team. That’s how political culture should be.

Khairy: In this journey, how did you view your relationship with Tun Taib at that time? Was it always good?

Abang Johari: It was as usual. You have to remember that I started with him. When the Ming Court crisis happened in 1987, our party was affected, and we stayed to help Tun Taib, showing my loyalty and trust in him. It should be noted that at that time, the Malay community was divided; even families were divided. My own family was divided too. But in the end, the party is more important. Stability and unity are crucial, right? After 1987, within 10 years, people came back. There was no purging, just moving forward. What happens now depends on our approaches and views.

Khairy: To summarise this first segment, my question relates to the future. We hope the Premier will continue to govern Sarawak, but earlier the Premier mentioned the transition during Tun Taib’s time and how he determined the successor. What will your style be in developing someone or a group who might be suitable to be chosen from within the party to gain trust? How do you choose a successor?

Abang Johari: It’s like a football team. To win, everyone in the team has a role to play. At the same time, you need a captain, and the captain must understand the roles of the other players. So, you can pass and throw. If you hold the ball alone, you can’t win. That’s how it should be done. To me, the team should exist; there will be a new team and a new captain. But the team remains the same, and the spirit of Ngap Sayot remains.

Khairy: Since we’re talking about football, we received a question from people in Sarawak. Surely if asked about your favourite team, the answer would be Sarawak or Kuching FC. But there’s still a question in doubt. For English football, what’s your favourite team?

Abang Johari: MU is good.

Khairy: Manchester United is good?

Abang Johari: Yes, MU is good. I went to Old Trafford to see them.

Khairy: Even better?

Khairy: Premier, we’re moving on to a segment that can be considered quite heated, which is the relationship between Sarawak and the federal government. This could be a contentious topic. Many might not fully understand Sarawak’s aspirations and might think that it could threaten Malaysia’s unity in the context of federalism. I want to start with an event that I consider a turning point in the relationship between the federal government and Sabah and Sarawak — the constitutional amendment presented at the end of 2021. The amendment to the Constitution replaced Article 1(2) with ‘States of the Federation’ and enshrined MA63 as the foundation of Malaysia. This has been followed by various other developments and successes. For instance, not only did we see the success of the amendment, but also the establishment of a council to oversee MA63, granting more power to Sarawak and Sabah. I was involved as the former Minister of Health in discussions with Datuk Sri Dr Sim Kui Hian regarding the proposed transfer of powers to Sarawak in the field of public health, which I agreed to, and we hope it will continue. Other developments include additional federal allocations to Sarawak approved by the National Finance Council, the transfer of gas sales and production activities in Sarawak to PETROS, and potentially the transfer of administration of the Bintulu Port. Many things have happened since the constitutional amendment, including the change of the Premier’s title from Chief Minister. To start this segment, Premier, where is this heading? Is Sarawak aiming to become a country within a country?

Abang Johari: The answer is this. Sarawak was part of the formation of Malaysia together with Sabah, then known as North Borneo, and Singapore. The formation of Malaysia was based on MA63, and we know that at that time, the region was in a ‘cold war’ and Britain wanted to relinquish its control over the countries or territories in the east. Thus, Britain wanted Sarawak, Sabah, Singapore, and the Federation of Malaya to merge into a country called Malaysia. There was a consultative process among the leaders in the region known as the Malaysia Consultative Committee, which led to the formation of the Cobbold Commission. This was the process, and in these discussions, leaders from Sarawak and Sabah wanted certain powers to be granted to our territories, including Singapore. As a result, a comprehensive agreement was reached, considering the Cobbold Commission’s views, which were enshrined in MA63, including some powers that Sarawak should retain. One important point here is that one of our leaders, the late Tun Jugah, had a saying: ‘Malaysia should not be like sugarcane — sweet at the beginning and bland at the end.’ This became a principle; promises must be kept. So, we have MA63 as a promise, and what we need to do now is to implement what was agreed upon. This is the process because land belongs to us, immigration is our right, and language is still ours under the Constitution and MA63. MA63 must be incorporated into the fundamental law, our constitution. That’s why when the seventh Prime Minister, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, proposed amending the constitution at that time, we in Sarawak said that if there were to be amendments, they should be comprehensive. At that time, only Article 1(2) was amended, not Article 160 of the Federal Constitution.

Khairy: To include the Malaysia Agreement as a foundation?

Abang Johari: No, no. He said according to the list. Formed by the Federation of Malaya, Article 1(2), Sarawak and Sabah. But it did not amend Article 160 because Article 160 interprets the Constitution of Malaysia as being based on the Federation of Malaya Agreement of 1957. This means the foundational agreement is from 1957, not MA63. If that isn’t included, then lawyers or judges interpreting the constitution would base it on 1957, not 1963.

Khairy: Is that why the Gabungan Parti Sarawak (GPS) did not support it at that time?

Abang Johari: Yes, we did not support it, and I instructed GPS to abstain unless Article 160 was included, along with MA63 and the Cobbold Commission. So, it was comprehensive. What we are doing now is simply implementing what is stipulated in the Constitution, the Sarawak State Constitution, MA63, and the Cobbold Commission. That’s it, and it cannot be more or less than that. Many people do not understand this background, which is the problem.

Shahril: I think the Premier understands that background, and that’s the first thing all Malaysians need to do. The question still remains, though: how do we embody the spirit of MA63 in the context of Sarawak? Because from the Peninsula, some might see Sarawak becoming stronger on its own with its own oil and airline companies. Perhaps soon there will be its own bank, port administration, sovereign fund, and there are even rumours of an American consulate being established in Sarawak. So, I think the original question is still relevant — could becoming a country within a country be the ultimate destination?

Abang Johari: No. Our national anthem is very clear — Sarawak is in Malaysia. My stance is that if Sarawak has its resources, and if these resources are strengthened, then its strength will be here. By adding value to these resources and strengthening our economy, Malaysia becomes stronger as well. You need to remember that the country’s economic drivers are the private sector. If the private sector is strong, who benefits from the taxes? Not the Sarawak government. Where does corporate tax go? We need to understand economic management because if it is driven by the private sector, the benefit goes to the federal government, not the state government. However, the state benefits from income and job opportunities. There may be some advantages, such as the State Sales Tax (SST) under our jurisdiction. We can implement SST according to what is outlined in the constitution. So, when I established PETROS, former Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak asked me, “Why establish PETROS?” He asked because PETRONAS’ top management inquired about it. I said, is it wrong for me to set up a company under the Companies Act? Is it wrong? He said, “Okay, okay.” So we cooperated. It’s just a state-owned company that provides services to oil and gas industry players, including PETRONAS. PETROS is not meant to compete with PETRONAS. No. We simply want PETROS to participate in the oil and gas sector work, considering what’s happening in the industry and based on what’s outlined in the constitution.

Khairy: Returning to the basic question, it is clear that it is not a country within a country. I am also trying to find the right analogy in this matter. Whether Sarawak and Sabah are like Scotland or Northern Ireland in the United Kingdom or Bavaria in the Federal Republic of Germany. Even though these terms or nomenclatures are not everything, what do we call Sarawak now? Clearly, it is not like the states in Peninsular Malaysia. What is the precise term for Sarawak and Sabah now?

Abang Johari: Indeed, many people refer to it as a region, and we refer to the establishment of Malaysia among Malaya, Sabah, and Sarawak — three components. So the definition is based on these three components within a country called Malaysia. Some may not be happy. For example, if the perception here is elevated, there is a perception of downgrading elsewhere. It depends on interpretation, but our original intention is good, which is that Malaysia must be peaceful and economically strong. If Sarawak is strong, Malaysia is strong. Bavaria is strong, and Germany is strong. Scotland and Wales are different because of different sentiments. So, it cannot be compared directly with what happens in the United Kingdom. But it can be compared to what happens in Bavaria. Actually, the administration of a federation can be divided into two blocks: centralised and decentralised. Centralised governance is dangerous because it does not consider the environment. Everything is focused only at the centre.

Khairy: Centralising power at the centre?

Abang Johari: Yes, centralising everything at the centre. That’s dangerous in any federation. However, if you have empowerment according to what’s in the Constitution, it should be fine. That’s why I believe there needs to be a process of decentralisation in certain economic and administrative areas. I have started this in Sarawak by establishing nine development agencies outside Kuching, including the Greater Kuching Coordinated Development Agency (GKCDA), Betong Division Development Agency (BDDA), Upper Rajang Development Agency (URDA), Northern Region Development Agency (NRDA), and nine in total. I allocated RM1.5 billion each for a three-year development project period. All projects are up to them to decide.

Khairy: Does the Premier believe that people with local experience are more qualified to make decisions?

Abang Johari: Yes, it’s from the bottom up. For example, if we say we want a road project, they know best. So, we allocate funds to the relevant agencies to make decisions, including tendering for projects.

Khairy: But it’s rare to find a Premier who agrees to delegate power. Usually, leaders would want to centralise power.

Abang Johari: I have already delegated. Overall, there are nine agencies. You multiply that by RM1.5 billion each, and it’s up to them. That’s why we call it decentralisation; you empower them. They can develop and know what is needed.

Khairy: But within the framework set by the state?

Abang Johari: Yes, it’s just a matter of bridging the gap. There’s a gap, right? So let them do it because they know. For example, in the Samarahan area, there is the Integrated Regional Samarahan Development Agency (IRSDA). They know the needs, like needing a levee to plant coconuts, which costs around RM400 million. So they decided to use the allocation we provided of RM1.5 billion. Similarly, in Kapit, they have their own allocation. We give them the power, and then they start implementing projects.

Khairy: Back to the demands under MA63. There has been a lot of progress since the constitutional amendments I mentioned earlier. I think it’s fair to say that since Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri, which was continued by Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, and maybe even before that, there might have been efforts from Tun Mahathir as well at the time to start the amendment process. What does Sarawak want but hasn’t yet achieved? I mentioned examples about public health and education. Are those also major sectors that Sarawak feels need to be decentralised?

Abang Johari: Decentralisation of power in those two sectors is crucial, namely education and health. Villagers, when they’re sick, go to the clinic, and you, a former health minister, know how our clinics are in the villages. That, I think, is very straightforward. We want to build new clinics with good facilities for nurses, doctors, and patients. It doesn’t require a huge allocation. Similarly, with dilapidated schools. I believe you know, and you were still in the Cabinet at the time, I said if the Federal government has issues, I’ll reimburse you RM1 billion. I think it has exceeded the usual allocation, but the money was put into a consolidated fund and used for regular projects. You know, this is our problem. Why couldn’t we be like now, where Anwar agrees with me because of a lot of bureaucracy, so we use Sarawak’s allocation first, and you reimburse us later? I have allocated RM100 million for projects to be implemented within 18 months for clinics and dilapidated schools. We do this in Sarawak itself, under the state Public Works Department (PWD). This means empowerment, and now we want to open a cancer hospital.

Khairy: Yes, I remember.

Abang Johari: Remember? The Federal government has agreed. But they said to use Sarawak’s allocation first, and then reimburse us later. Here, the central-state cooperation must be strong, with mutual trust. It’s not easy for us to spend more than RM1 billion on a cancer centre that should be funded by the Federal government.

Khairy: Premier, regarding expenditure, we understand why the decentralisation of power is demanded to facilitate the spending being made by the state government. But, for example, in the field of education, when you ask for shared responsibility or even decentralisation, does it also mean that, for instance, the curriculum will be different in Sarawak later? If education is decentralised, will the medium of instruction and subjects differ from the national curriculum? Some might worry that their educational aspirations will change.

Abang Johari: No, it has nothing to do with policy because the policy remains national. The national education policy is still there. What we want is to grant a bit of power to the Sarawak Director of Education to implement development programmes and infrastructure. That’s all. What we ask is to give power to the Director of Education. Even for building a small school, you must go to KL. That’s one issue. Secondly, Malaysia has two policies: national policy and private education. So what I did is, in our constitution, we still use the national language, Bahasa Malaysia, alongside English. We use what’s in the constitution and this space to develop private schools and private universities owned by Sarawak. This means there are two channels — we want Sarawakians to be the manpower in the new economy. We also need English. Similarly, in the field of Information Technology (IT), science, and renewable energy, all require English. Splitting water molecules into hydrogen requires English and physics. So if we have children who are well-educated in these fields, the future will be bright. But if we’re confined, we only become ‘jagoh kampung’ (village champions). Do we want to be village or global champions in this era?

Shahril: Premier, I think talking about the petroleum issue is important because it is one of the major sources of revenue for Sarawak. We also realise that the majority of oil and gas reserves are here. Many might understand a bit about the legal and positional aspects of Sarawak’s rights and sovereignty over oil and petroleum resources. In Malaysia, we know the Petroleum Development Act (PDA) 1974, but perhaps many in Peninsular Malaysia do not know that here there is the Oil Mining Ordinance (OMO) 1958. How do the PDA, OMO, the land code, and all that give sovereignty to Sarawak coexist?

Abang Johari: I think there’s no problem; they can coexist. PDA and OMO can coexist. Only the initial interpretation of PDA was absolute, so PETRONAS became absolute. But PDA cannot override or bypass the constitution. Our supreme law is the constitution, that’s it. But in the constitution, what existed before Malaysia is still valid. Meaning OMO was already there in 1958, it wasn’t repealed, meaning that law still exists with Sarawak having some power in terms of mining, and oil and gas are mining industries. That’s number one. Number two, the Queen in Council in 1954 outlined Sarawak’s boundaries, and it cannot be changed or amended according to the constitution. The constitution states that boundaries cannot be amended except with the consent of the State Legislative Assembly and the Council of Rulers. This means it hasn’t happened, so our boundaries are still within the continental shelf, but we can cooperate with the federal government to manage resources in the oil and gas industry. For me, there’s no problem. That’s why I said PETROS and PETRONAS are partners in the gas industry.

Shahril: The Gas Distribution Ordinance (Amendment) 2023 is also a debated issue. How can it be ensured that this benefits Sarawak, considering it gives the right as a gas aggregator to determine where the gas goes? At the same time, exporting liquefied natural gas (LNG) is important for Malaysia. How do Premier and Sarawak balance these interests?

Abang Johari: It’s balanced because it doesn’t affect gas production for LNG. You have to remember that Sarawak has a 25 per cent stake in LNG.

Shahril: Yes, and Sarawak also receives sales tax.

Abang Johari: Correct. We only supply raw materials to LNG, and LNG then supplies to buyers, including Tokyo Electric in Japan, so there is no impact. If new gas is discovered, we cooperate with whoever wants to buy it. Our problem was that when PETRONAS was the aggregator, we hadn’t yet been subject to the aggregator law, so we couldn’t get gas.

Shahril: Did PETRONAS not supply it?

Abang Johari: PETRONAS didn’t supply it. Sarawak Energy Berhad (SEB) wanted gas, but PETRONAS didn’t provide it and set the price. So there was an anomaly. If you look at our law, gas distribution was already established before Malaysia. In Miri and Seriak in Brunei, there were gas pipes directly to homes. So, if that happens, the law is already there, and we use that law while cooperating with PETRONAS in the gas industry. We need Petronas too.

Shahril: So PETRONAS and the Malaysian government shouldn’t worry?

Abang Johari: They shouldn’t. There’s nothing to worry about because we are cooperating.

Shahril: Agreements with buyers in Japan and Korea can still proceed?

Abang Johari: Yes. I’m just concerned that it might be politicised. People might politicise it and say — look, everything is Sarawak, everything is Sarawak, everything is Sarawak. That’s dangerous. When actually, it’s in accordance with our agreement and constitution.

Khairy: Premier, I understand what you’re saying. But we can’t ignore the political element, as all the successes and rights returned to Sarawak regarding these concessions are due to the current political situation. We can’t deny that, using the English term, Sarawak hit while the iron is hot, which leads to the perception that it’s politically related. Sarawak is now getting its rightful due because of political instability in Peninsular Malaysia and Sarawak’s strength. So, the political aspect will always be present.

Abang Johari: Indeed. You know, some people will take advantage of this situation. What’s happening now is the restoration or reclaiming of rights that have been eroded, either deliberately or unintentionally. If it’s our right and it’s politicised as if we are taking someone else’s right, it means they have an insincere view. They are not sincere because they use their advantage to seize our rights, and it can happen the other way around. Sarawakians ask me, ‘What is this? Are we a new colony?’ After all, it is our right, and it can happen the other way around. When you are sincere, you’d say, ‘Let it be their right. But we also cooperate with them.’ This is what I am doing now; we have new ideas on how to manage it, and at the end of the day, we share it together. It doesn’t mean we deny rights; we use what we have. We are sincere, and if you do the opposite, it means you are not sincere. You try because you are strong and they are weak. Just as they feel we are strong and they are weak. No, no, no, it’s not like that; it’s just exercising our rights. If there is such an assumption, it is dangerous. Dangerous for the federal.

Shahril: In my opinion, there was an elegant solution during the Commercial Settlement Agreement (CSA) with PETRONAS. If the Premier can confirm, PETRONAS recognised OMO and Sarawak recognised the PDA, and there was no conflict, could that be a model to be implemented in other areas as well?

Abang Johari: Correct. That’s why, in the CSA, we told PETRONAS and the federal government, why not cooperate? That is where the commercial agreement came from, and in similar fields, the objective is the same. You must remember that Malaysia is just one country among many others. Malaysia cannot stand alone; you have to cooperate with neighbouring countries. Similarly, we must cooperate within the country, and only Sarawakians can manage Sarawak. It is our advantage and how we see it.

Shahril: Regarding the future economy of Sarawak, the Premier mentioned a new economy centred on hydrogen. If we look from afar, it becomes one of the economic planning pillars with the target of producing 240,000 tons annually, making Sarawak one of the largest green energy producers in the world, including exports to Korea, Japan, and others by 2030. This is a game-changer for Sarawak. The question is, is it realistic? Does the Premier feel that it is achievable, and what gives that confidence?

Abang Johari: We look at the global situation because climate change is our main challenge now. According to the Kyoto Protocol, Paris, and recently in Dubai, it is indeed a global problem, and we must find a solution to climate change. One of the main reasons is carbon emissions, and carbon comes from hydrocarbons. Hydrocarbons are included in fossil fuels. That’s why we have related what we discussed earlier with PETRONAS. PETRONAS must consider the future. If there is no demand for fossil fuels, it means these fuels will lose their value. This could happen within 15 years, in my view. At the United Nations Climate Conference (COP28) in Dubai, we saw that Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) countries want to maintain fossil fuels, while non-OPEC countries oppose this because it causes global problems. In this context, scientists say the cleanest fuel is hydrogen. We know that water is H2O. By splitting H2O into two molecules, hydrogen and oxygen, hydrogen becomes the cleanest fuel. Sarawak is blessed with abundant water, rivers, rainwater, and our dams; these can be used to produce hydrogen, which will be used by various industries. The challenge lies in the cost of producing hydrogen.

Khairy: For this question, is it feasible?

Abang Johari: Yes, the question is related to cost. It is like computers; when I was in school, we used punch cards, and the memory was huge, but now it’s in the palm of your hand. So, this will also happen with electrolysis technology because when I first used it, 1kg of hydrogen required 60 kilowatt-hours, meaning the energy was high. I went to PETRONAS Bangi, where they have research, and with new membranes produced, the 60 kilowatt-hours dropped to 30 kilowatt-hours. Coincidentally, the scientist is a Sarawakian, an Iban from Sri Aman. So, what is happening now is I believe that electrolysis will reduce in terms of technology and cost, the power usage will be reduced, meaning the cost will be less. If a new membrane is added, I think now it might be 28 kilowatt-hours. If this happens, I think it will drop to 15 and 10 kilowatt-hours, possibly within 15 years. So, the price of hydrogen will be cheaper, perhaps better than diesel, and then you no longer need subsidies because there is an alternative energy source. What I am saying here is we have the resources, but we need renewable energy to break it. We have green renewable energy. When you have green energy, that’s what the world needs. The world wants this. I see we have an advantage; Malaysia has an advantage through Sarawak in this regard.

Khairy: A projection of 15 per cent revenue from the sale of electricity, especially renewable energy from hydro sources under the plan by 2030 — is that figure realistic?

Abang Johari: Possibly more than that because the energy in Sarawak is 70 per cent renewable, and the rest is gas turbines. We have gas too, but it doesn’t necessarily have to be used for energy. It can be used for petrochemical products. If gas is methane and methane is CH4, if you remove the carbon, it’s just H, which is H4. Besides that, ships now use ammonia, which is NH3 and add nitrogen. We can use ammonia to produce ammonia, and what is needed is to produce hydrogen, which requires energy, renewable energy. I mean, if electrolysis is low, it means hydrogen is available, and now there is technology with power plants where the source is only hydrogen going into the power plant, and then it comes out as energy. The concept of P, G to P (Power to Gas to Power). This means we become renewable energy producers, for us in Sarawak.

Shahril: So, Premier, we see this as your biggest move to make Sarawak a hydrogen economic power. This is what you see as the future and a game-changer for Sarawak. So, my question is, will the power plants be sufficient to produce hydrogen, and how do you respond to the criticism that there are still many basic infrastructure facilities in Sarawak that are not sufficient, yet the focus is on big things like hydrogen?

Abang Johari: We use hydrogen to generate income, and the proceeds are then used for infrastructure development. I approved an allocation of RM20 billion for the coastal road project, using state funds for construction over four years. It’s not a small amount; if we waited for the federal government, this project wouldn’t happen.

Khairy: What project is this, Premier?

Abang Johari: This is the construction of the coastal road. It includes bridges because we have many rivers; that’s why we must build bridges. The Batang Lupar Bridge alone is worth RM1 billion, not to mention Batang Lassa, Batang Paloh, Batang Saribas, and others. With so many rivers, all of them cost RM20 billion. If we don’t have money, how? And this will open rural areas with agriculture becoming an important sector. Therefore, in terms of infrastructure, electricity, and water supply are important. For your information, I allocated RM4.2 billion over four years for water supply projects, and RM2.4 billion for electricity supply, all using state funds. Where did the money come from? We have to find revenue, and it goes back to the people. This is to uplift the rural areas, so you need manpower. By 2026, I want to provide free higher education to all Sarawakians at Sarawak universities. This will elevate basic knowledge, and it will become a player in the new industry.

Khairy: Taking the example of Bakun, Batang Ai, and Murum dams, approximately 2,000 megawatts. To increase hydro generation capacity to 9,000 megawatts for export, is there a plan to add more dams? Besides the proposal to build three cascading dams, there were past criticisms of resettlement in Bakun. What is the Premier’s response to concerns about resettlement, as we understand there will be people affected, but this necessity is greater, so how is this managed?

Abang Johari: No. We will not affect the settlements. Cascading dams are different because they are gravity-fed. So, we use rivers, and rivers have no people. Unlike Bakun and Murum, where the entire area needed to be submerged. Cascade dams are a new way. Moreover, I went to Batang Ai last month. It can produce 108 megawatts now. So we tried floating solar; we installed it in Batang Ai with a water body of around 8,500 hectares. We only used three per cent or 86 hectares of the total 8,500 hectares to produce 50 megawatts of solar. Imagine if we used just 60 per cent of the water body, with the rest for fish and other uses, you could produce around 2,000 megawatts. This is new; it was not in our agenda before. It is my agenda because I went there. I calculated; that’s just Batang Ai, not including Murum and Bakun. So I see our potential is more than 15 gigawatts. That means 15,000 megawatts.

Shahril: Today’s capacity is around three to four gigawatts?

Abang Johari: Today Batang Ai has 108 megawatts with a water body of about 8,500 hectares but not including floating solar. So I tried this new way, floating solar; it only uses about three per cent of the water body to produce 50 megawatts. This means the potential for renewable energy is there. There is no issue affecting people because we use cascade dams, which means river water flow.

Khairy: It doesn’t affect people on the riverbanks?

Abang Johari: No, it doesn’t affect them because the area is like a rapid, and what we do is place turbines there, and energy comes out. I don’t think it affects people; besides, we have many rivers, and if not used, the water still flows down, right? So we put more turbines there.

Shahril: Based on my understanding, green energy becomes Sarawak’s competitive advantage and is to be exported as a source of revenue. Then the hydrogen economy adds value. Coupled with higher revenue from hydrocarbon PETROS. What is in the Premier’s vision, perhaps not in documents, for about 20 years to come? What is the projected annual revenue, and what do you see it being spent on?

Khairy: I would like to ask a follow-up question. Hearing all of this, I am trying to understand the economic philosophy of the Premier in Sarawak. It seems that there is a significant institutionalisation of wealth for Sarawak, as we have studied the Premier’s movements. This includes rural air services, banks, ports, and so on. So, there are many basic infrastructure, financial, logistical, and transportation activities that are now either owned or controlled by the state, not including the Sarawak Future Sovereign Wealth Fund. The Premier mentioned that these initiatives are not just for building basic infrastructure but are also aimed at investing for the future, similar to Norway’s Sovereign Wealth Fund. So, is the Premier’s philosophy to build wealth for the state, not for today, not for the next 10 years, but for the next generation?

Abang Johari: Yes, it is for the future. You see, if the European Union (EU) is affected, the economy is affected but Norway, Denmark and Finland are not affected. Our economy is somewhat similar to the Scandinavian countries. Not big but sustainable and revolves around professionalism. In the past, policies were different, not to criticise, but whoever knew would get it. Now, if an economic entity is not related to an individual and if it is associated with the government, you get professionals to manage it, and then the question of hiring and firing arises. So at the same time, their salary will be high, meaning it is based on merit. If we give it to A, and A cannot manage, he fails, everything will fail. If there are many more, the whole system will fail. So, the capital must be managed well, and those who manage it must be people who know the field, and it is based on merit. It’s okay to pay a big salary as long as they give dividends in return. That’s the key performance index (KPI); if it’s not good, you get fired. What I want to do now is to establish something like the Sarawak Corporation, where the shares are owned by the people, and we bring in professionals to manage it. It is owned by the people and the government. It is not owned by individuals, entities, or families. Even if it’s a family member, they must be professional; otherwise, they will be fired. If there is a relative or two, we don’t even know if they are our relatives or not. If they have the name Abang, people might say they are all my relatives, but actually, they are not my relatives, maybe distant relatives. This is what we want to do. Our economy must be sustainable and for the future of the state. We have a sovereign wealth fund as savings because income must be managed. There are three components: regular expenditure, savings, and investment. These three things must be proportionate; investments are for returns later. If it rains, we already have sources and savings; regular expenditure is to manage the country and prevent bankruptcy, so we do not need to depend on others.

Shahril: Earlier, Khairy mentioned institutionalising wealth. But hearing the explanation from the Premier, it also institutionalised a vision. One day, it might be harder when someone else takes over because what has been explained here is the Premier’s vision. Are you confident that this vision will be continued?

Abang Johari: I cannot comment on that because individuals are different, right? But if the system is established, it must be changed by the people because the people will make the decision. Moreover, we are in a democratic system, and the people will judge your performance. Going back to the objective earlier, “Lillahi Taala” (For Allah the Almighty), if someone holds that, they will stay true. If someone does not hold that, they will deviate.

Khairy: I am intrigued by what was mentioned earlier about institutionalising wealth. Asking for it to be managed professionally and providing dividends for the state, which are then spent on the people who own Sarawak. I like that concept. One of the proposals mentioned is free education. Of all the initiatives, this one is very close to my heart because I strongly believe in human capital development. Some 25,000 eligible Sarawakian children will be given free education at state-owned universities like University of Technology Sarawak (UTS), Curtin University, Swinburne University, and others. The Premier said this is good for the future as it is human capital development, but do you also believe that higher education is a public benefit that should be provided almost free to the children of the state or the nation?

Abang Johari: Indeed, when you have resources that are then channelled towards the right strategies and sectors, and education is the best sector. In fact, technology is changing now; in the past, we depended on oil and gas, but in 10 or 15 years, there will be no more oil, no value. If you have an alternative, it will certainly require some expertise and skills of local children, a society that can adapt to the demands of the time. Let’s say in the past, people used buses, now we use Automated Rapid Transit (ART). In the past, combustion engines but now we use hydrogen, and maintenance is different. We need to build services and support to transition towards the new economy, and our children must learn more advanced disciplines than we currently have because the ecosystem has changed. In the past, to be honest, I mean, there was no climate change issue, but now there are floods and global warming affecting agriculture. We have to find scientists who can handle the agriculture sector in new ways, even the way of fertilisation is different. When we have an evolution, the way of thinking and approaches are different. If we want to be a great country, we must have the right framework. That’s for the future, politics must also be right; if politics is chaotic, who wants to come?

Shahril: Regarding anak Sarawak, how does the Premier ensure they can return and serve the state?

Abang Johari: That’s why our economy must have trained individuals who can play a role. If the economy is low, these people will not return, they will go elsewhere. For example, when I created ART, Sarawakian children returned to serve in it. When I opened SMD Semiconductor, anak Sarawak working in Silicon Valley, USA, also returned. It means the economy must match the training; if the economy still uses hoes, then hoes will be used. If there is no Internet of Things (IoT) here, but your child is an IoT person, how can they want to come, they will certainly go elsewhere. But if you use IoT, the child will return, not the typical farmer image with a hat, struggling face, and carrying a hoe. Who wants to be involved in that sector? Instead, if using an iPad, there is IoT and farm control at your fingertips, young people will want to get involved. Not the struggling face, planting rice, and sweating, sorry, this is just an example.

Shahril: Quite an appropriate analogy.

Khairy: Very impressive. Now we want to move on to politics. Earlier, the Premier mentioned that to become an advanced and high-income state, there is no point if politics is chaotic. I want to throw out a view and maybe get a response. GPS is a political giant in Malaysia now, if you were to arrange the ranking of the most powerful people in the country politically, putting aside the kings and the prime minister, the second person, in my opinion, is certainly the Premier of Sarawak. I will explain why, because the key to the current government and perhaps to the government after the 16th General Election (GE) is the Premier, the leader of GPS. Do you agree with the perception that you are a ‘kingmaker’ and does this mean that GPS is transactional, willing to work with anyone who can get a majority in the Peninsula?

Abang Johari: What happened in the last five years, when the Barisan Nasional (BN) government lost? We saw that Sarawak gave many seats to BN at that time, only losing eight, while the BN government could not govern. Due to such a situation and we saw that there might be problems after this, I decided to let us leave BN first but can cooperate with BN. Because the political situation in Sarawak and the Peninsula is not the same. I hold the belief that only Sarawakians understand Sarawak politics better due to the existing ecosystem here, a multi-ethnic, religious, and cultural society that has already settled well. So we left, let us manage ourselves and here we face a bit of a problem, not much, just a bit with many of our projects cancelled. But when there was a problem of changing the prime minister at that time, and no one could have the number or majority to become prime minister, the King asked us in Sarawak who we supported as a replacement for Tun Mahathir. At that time Tun Mahathir wanted to form a Unity Government but failed. We said, between Tun Mahathir, Anwar, and Muhyiddin, Muhyiddin had the most support at that time. I said, for the sake of Malaysia, we give support to Muhyiddin. Then the King called me while I was in Sungai Asap, Belaga in the morning, and I only managed to get back to the Istana Negara at 2pm. Then, Muhyiddin was appointed prime minister at 5pm on the same day. This means that Sarawak gave the numbers to support Muhyiddin. After that, when Muhyiddin faced problems, he called me and told me that the UMNO party had withdrawn its support. I asked him who would replace him. In the end, Ismail became the prime minister, which was again about numbers. Similarly, in the last general election, there was the same issue, and eventually, Anwar became the prime minister. The Yang di-Pertuan Agong also called Sarawak, expressing the need for unity, and I said, ‘Alright, we will join the government.’ This created the perception that we are the ‘kingmakers’, but from the perspective of numbers, it’s true because support is needed. For GPS, these numbers are essential for political and national stability. That’s how it is now, and we have to see what the future holds as we do not know the political situation yet. It is crucial for GPS that Malaysia has a stable government with clear policies.

Khairy: Cynical views might say that GPS will give support for the sake of unity. While we do not deny that intention, because I believe and am convinced that GPS genuinely wants to see a stable country. However, in addition to that support, the cynical view will ensure that whoever receives the support must reciprocate in ways such as the restoration of rights under the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) and other demands. This is part of political manoeuvring, and it can’t be denied that there will be perceptions or even realities. After the next election, will this happen again, meaning if you want GPS support, you must be committed to Sabah and Sarawak, in this case, GPS?

Abang Johari: For me, no. I say this is already our right.

Khairy: But these are rights that have been denied for so long, so you must ensure that someone will return those rights?

Abang Johari: You must acknowledge and recognise that these are our rights. That’s it. Whoever becomes the prime minister must acknowledge our rights. What we are doing now is based on and guided by Sarawak’s rights. Based on the Constitution and MA63. That’s all. Whoever becomes the prime minister must acknowledge these rights. There is a perception in the Peninsula that we are being excessive in our demands. I ask, am I being excessive? I have never asked for more than what is stated in the constitution.

Shahril: So, rumours that say before anyone takes an oath of office, they must negotiate with GPS first and accept GPS demands before receiving support are not true?

Abang Johari: No, not true. With the three prime ministers so far, we have never asked for anything excessive. We did not demand more from Anwar, nor did I ask Muhyiddin for anything.

Khairy: But surely, Premier, it’s implied that if they don’t comply, they might not get GPS support?

Abang Johari: No, that’s why I want to clarify this. We in Sarawak have never asked for anything excessive. It’s you who have the problem, not us. Isn’t that right? You have the problem, you want me, so I give you my support. But I have never asked for anything. So far, with all three prime ministers, I have never asked for anything. I only mentioned MA63. You must acknowledge our rights under MA63. Tomorrow, if one of you becomes prime minister, it will be the same thing. Suppose one of you (Khairy or Shahril) becomes prime minister, you must acknowledge this. We are not asking for anything. I have never asked for anything. Otherwise, what do you want? We just want Malaysia to be strong. Don’t forget that the new Indonesian capital, Nusantara, is right next to Sarawak. I mentioned unity before, saying if Malaysia regresses while others progress. Just look at our border post between Tebedu and Entikong.

Khairy: Perhaps for our viewers who don’t know, what is the difference?

Abang Johari: Entikong is our border post in West Kalimantan, while Tebedu is in Malaysia. Entikong is like an airport, while Tebedu looks like a chicken coop. What does that mean? If we are constantly bickering, you can’t accomplish your tasks; look at others. Sorry, I have to say this.

Khairy: That’s okay; that’s why we’re here at KS, not RTM.

Abang Johari: You know, we don’t aim to become Prime Ministers. That’s up to you. It’s the right of the Malaysian people.

Khairy: Premier, regarding that, there were rumours after the 15th General Election when there was a hung parliament. I’m not sure, but it’s from a credible source, saying that there was an offer for a GPS leader to be chosen as prime minister. That’s history, true or not; perhaps the Premier can confirm. And if that didn’t happen in the last election, why not in the next one? If GPS is really key to forming the government, why not take the Prime Minister’s position?

Abang Johari: In this matter, we need to be realistic. There are 222 parliamentary seats, but how many of them belong to Sarawak?

Shahril: Based on MA63, maybe more in the future.

Khairy: That might be something to discuss later.

Abang Johari: No, out of 222 parliamentary seats, how many are from Sarawak? And there are personalities with high ambitions. If Sarawak — you know, we don’t have many seats, and tomorrow we’ll be out. After that, there will be one crisis after another. That’s why I said the ‘Dubai Move’. What happened in Dubai, including allegedly naming me as a replacement for Anwar. I asked why. I know we only have 23 seats, and the next day, the one with the larger majority will say — eh, we can’t have the person with 23 seats; let’s replace them. It will be a never-ending problem. I say this is for now, perhaps later we don’t know.

Khairy: That’s what I was asking, maybe later.

Abang Johari: I think it depends on the configuration in parliament; if there’s no majority, then no.

Shahril: Premier, following a similar question about political strength, all that Sarawak gets, these rights and so on, are based on political strength, the backbone of which is GPS winning big in Parliament and the State Assembly. How do you plan for GPS’ future so that it doesn’t end up divided like in Peninsular Malaysia, but united in Sarawak?

Abang Johari: That depends on the leadership style; the important thing is the confidence and fairness we can provide to those under our leadership. That’s important, which is why I established the Unit for Other Religious Affairs (UNIFOR). People see that we share together because religion is a belief; we help those who want to connect with God. We help them. Don’t block them; after all, it’s all for good. Even Prophet Muhammad used the Charter of Medina to unite those under Islamic rule. So, we in Sarawak also follow the Charter of Medina, and I think what’s important is the right policies. For the future, if Sarawak progresses, Malaysia will also progress.

Shahril: Premier, do you believe that given the current situation, GPS will continue to be dominant in the coming years?

Abang Johari: Can you tell me if Peninsular Malaysia will not improve?

Shahril: I think the situation in the peninsula is more challenging, as no single party can manage as GPS does in Sarawak.

Abang Johari: I think maybe one day the configuration will change in the Peninsula, who knows.

Khairy: The 12th State Election (PRN) must be held no later than 2026, two years from now. In the current unity government, GPS is cooperating with several parties that also exist in Sarawak, such as Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) and the Democratic Action Party (DAP). Will GPS maintain its stance of contesting all seats?

Abang Johari: Yes!

Khairy: How does this affect cooperation at the federal government level now?

Abang Johari: The federal government is one thing, and the state government is another.

Khairy: So, cooperation at the federal level, but in the next election, there will be a clash?

Abang Johari: If they want to clash.

Khairy: If they don’t clash?

Abang Johari: Then there won’t be a clash.

Khairy: So, it won’t exist in Sarawak?

Abang Johari: Yes, it won’t exist; even now, it doesn’t exist.

Shahril: What are your key performance indicators (KPIs) for the next state election (PRN)? What are your targets?

Khairy: Currently, you have 76 out of 82 seats.

Abang Johari: Actually, GPS now has 80 seats because the Parti Sarawak Bersatu (PSB) has been dissolved.

Khairy: Oh yes, that’s correct.

Abang Johari: We’ll see.

Khairy: If there is no competition, what kind of checks and balances are there? Are you concerned about becoming too powerful in Sarawak?

Abang Johari: No, because our component parties are also very critical.

Shahril: Is there healthy internal debate?

Abang Johari: Yes.

Khairy: Bringing up a topic often discussed in both the Peninsula and Sarawak, regarding the issue of redelineation, it must be done within the period stipulated by the election law under the Election Commission. Each state will try to do it, as will the parliament. These are two different processes, one at the parliamentary level and one at the state level. I’m sure the Premier doesn’t want to reveal too much about strategy, but what are the conditions for increasing the number of seats in Sarawak? Does it depend on areas that are already densely populated or areas that do not reflect diversity and are too monocentric? Furthermore, if there is an increase in parliamentary seats, will Sabah and Sarawak demand that the spirit of the Cobbold Commission, which is 30 per cent be adhered to?

Abang Johari: Indeed, after 10 years, there is redelineation, and there are two factors: rural areas, which do not depend on population, and urban areas, which do. We follow Westminster, considering all the representatives placed. This is one factor considered in redistricting studies. Regarding the issue of 30 per cent parliamentary seats, we want there to be balance from a constitutional perspective because it can be amended by two-thirds. If we don’t have one-third, or a little more than one-third, you can change the constitution as you wish.

Khairy: Concerning Sabah and Sarawak?

Abang Johari: Yes, concerning Sabah and Sarawak.

Khairy: Yes, that makes sense.

Abang Johari: Before, we had Singapore, Sabah, and Sarawak. When Singapore left in 1965, everything here returned to the Peninsula. It does not follow the principle. That’s it. We want it to be a little more than one-third, so you can’t amend the constitution arbitrarily. This is our principle.

Shahril: Earlier, you mentioned Nusantara; one of the challenges for many countries in this region is the South China Sea issue. At the Sarawak level, we discuss the 200-nautical-mile continental shelf, the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), and so on. This is not only a matter between Malaysia and Sarawak but also with China itself. How does the Premier see the wisdom and capability of Sarawak, together with Malaysia, in managing any issues and threats — if we can use that term — with patrol boats and so on from China that might disrupt the maritime boundaries of Sarawak-Malaysia?

Abang Johari: I leave it to foreign policy because it is decided by the Federal Government. Of course, we have some diplomatic approaches to solve problems that may arise in the South China Sea, whether through, for example, sharing how to manage if there are minerals — this provides a win-win situation for all parties. It depends on diplomacy and foreign policy.

Shahril: Does Sarawak want to be more actively involved in discussions on this matter or leave it to Putrajaya?

Abang Johari: We listen to Putrajaya; it is up to Putrajaya to make decisions.

Khairy: I appreciate the Premier’s diplomatic answer. However, when we discuss the South China Sea, the most affected are Sarawak and Sabah because you are at the forefront of this issue.

Abang Johari: Yes, indeed.

Khairy: When there is an intrusion by ships from China, for example, in the Beting Patinggi Ali area, which has happened several times, this will affect fishermen, offshore activities, and so on. Even though the Premier’s answer is correct that this comes from federal policy, it is certainly a concern in Sarawak if the central government does not have a firm response in defending our maritime borders because it will impact this state.

Abang Johari: Of course, but we must have confidence in the Federal Government to manage this matter. If we take action, let’s say, hypothetically, we also want to play a role; this could also become a policy of divide and rule, where certain entities support Sarawak.

Khairy: Yes, I understand.

Shahril: If I may emphasise a bit, are there external parties, without the Premier having to reveal too many details, trying to influence others in such a way?

Abang Johari: Because the current problem isn’t a major issue in that area. They are just sailing, and there is no major problem.

Khairy: But I think the question earlier was about potential intrusions into our waters, but more about efforts to disrupt the security and sovereignty of Sarawak. This is because there are also political actors in Sarawak still trying to push for a secession agenda, and we know there is one political party campaigning on the goal of leaving Malaysia. That’s why we want to put this geopolitical context into the discussion, as there might be external elements trying, as the Premier mentioned earlier, a divide-and-rule strategy.

Abang Johari: Yes, maybe. We’ll see, we’ll monitor what’s happening. I feel that some parties want to follow Catalonia in Spain. We say it’s not necessary. We need to have a sense of regionalism. We can’t rely on just one entity; even Malaysia can’t do it alone. We have to cooperate with our neighbours. It was different during the Cold War when we had Afro-Asian ties and military alliances between New Zealand, Australia, and the United Kingdom, though I’m not sure if those still exist. But it’s not as close-knit. So, what we need now is our own cooperation, with China, the United States, and so on. The main players here are those two countries, and it is based on the law of the sea. In my view, it’s more about disputes over maritime navigation.

Shahril: But does China also claim the right to navigate in mineral-rich areas?

Abang Johari: Yes, that’s the Spratly Islands they want to claim. But I think this is where we need to cooperate with the international community. See what their views are.

Khairy: Premier, if we look at Kalimantan, Sarawak has investments there, such as the Mentarang Induk Hydropower Project. There is also a large project being built in Kalimantan, and with Prabowo Subianto winning as President, I think this project will continue as he is one of the committed candidates. What is the vision or expectation for Sarawak in terms of the spillover effects of Indonesia’s capital city moving to Kalimantan?

Abang Johari: You know, in our region, there is an agreement to establish the ASEAN Power Grid. For over five years, we have been supplying electricity to West Kalimantan, and now we are investing in East Kalimantan. We invest and become part of that grid, also supplying to Singapore and Peninsular Malaysia. I have promised them, each one gigawatt for Singapore and the Peninsula. Sarawak also has a common corridor for undersea cables. So, to answer this, I say we must have an integrated vision for the whole of ASEAN. This includes Borneo, and we have already connected with Singapore and the Peninsula. The Peninsula has a grid reaching Laos; this is an integrated grid. This means we are creating something like what exists in the EU in terms of mobility. In the EU, you can go anywhere. This will be a step towards integrating the whole of ASEAN. In this matter, there must be consensus among ASEAN countries, and if this happens, our East Asian partners need to recognise our region’s integrated economy, and perhaps our issues related to the South China Sea will also decrease. If we have an integrated economy within ASEAN. One of the important things is energy, which is why Sarawak is planning this way. We want to integrate with countries in this region, including our important neighbour. It’s only a 20-minute flight from Kuching to Nusantara. That’s why I said we are developing together, and Sarawak wants to build a new airport modelled after Doha’s Hamad International Airport in Qatar.

Shahril: Premier, in the context of this geopolitical strategy, is your vision to export energy directly to demand sources, such as exporting directly to Singapore, without going through the Peninsula?

Abang Johari: We also have limits because we need energy too. But if there is excess electricity, it’s not useful if stored; it has no economic value, right? So, we sell it. However, the energy must be low-cost and green because it is part of our contribution to addressing climate change. So, Sarawak’s role now is not just for this state but actually for Malaysia and the entire Asia region, utilising our strengths, which our partners may lack. It complements each other.

Shahril: How do other countries view Sarawak now, when they come to meet the Premier?

Abang Johari: I was invited to Sydney, Australia to speak about hydrogen next month. Two months ago, I was in Poland also giving a lecture on hydrogen. I have also just received an invitation from Hong Kong to give a speech about hydrogen, the hydrogen economy, and new energy. This means that Malaysia, especially Sarawak, is recognised worldwide in this energy transition. I see that if the world acknowledges this, we should just follow along.

Khairy: I want to summarise from this nearly two-hour interview: the Premier’s leadership, I don’t like using this term lightly or casually. But God willing, if implemented, even half of these visions, the Premier will be remembered as a ‘consequential leader of Sarawak’, meaning the impact will resonate for generations to come. This is because you have a vision, clear thinking, and the ability to seize political opportunities now.

Abang Johari: I’m not an opportunist.

Khairy: I didn’t use that word, Premier. I said you are using the political opportunities that any politician should use for Sarawak, for Sarawak’s sake. I think anyone in the Premier’s position with that vision would do the same because this is the right time for Sarawak. We wish for these plans to succeed.

Abang Johari: God willing.

Khairy: Sarawak continues to provide political stability to Malaysia, following perhaps less clear political stability in other areas. Sarawak can continue to provide that political stability for the sake of Malaysia. For Sarawak to remain within Malaysia. Thank you, Premier.

Abang Johari: Thank you.

Shahril: Thank you, Premier. I think regarding Malaysia, empathy is the most important value, and I very much like the Premier saying, ‘If Sarawak succeeds, Malaysia succeeds.’ God willing.