New Economic Colonisation: A Modern Parallel to British Colonialism in Malaysia

The recent revelations about the proposed economic agreement between the US and Ukraine reveal a troubling vision for the future of post-conflict nations, and it draws uncomfortable parallels to Malaysia’s history under British colonialism. Just as the British Empire exploited Malaysia’s natural resources and established a system that served British economic interests, the new terms presented by the US for Ukraine mirror a modern form of economic colonisation.

Under British colonial rule, Malaysia was turned into a resource extraction colony, where the economy was designed to benefit the colonial power rather than the local population. Rubber, tin, and other valuable resources were extracted for British profit, with little regard for the development of the local economy or the well-being of the Malaysian people. The British controlled the key sectors of agriculture, mining, and trade, leaving the local population with limited power and economic autonomy. This system not only drained Malaysia’s wealth but also created a dependency on the colonial power, a theme echoed in the terms being proposed for Ukraine.

1. Resource Control and Joint Investment Fund

The proposed deal between the US and Ukraine is reminiscent of how the British controlled Malaysia’s natural resources, such as tin and rubber. The agreement suggests creating a “Joint Investment Fund” between the US and Ukraine to oversee the country’s resources, effectively granting the US near-total control. Just as the British controlled the flow of resources from Malaysia, the US would have extensive authority over Ukraine’s mineral, oil, and gas resources. This would place Ukraine in a situation where its most valuable assets are controlled by foreign powers, much like Malaysia’s rubber and tin mines were under British dominance.

2. Revenue Sharing: A Modern-Day Exploitation

A key component of the proposed US-Ukraine agreement is the revenue-sharing scheme, where the US would take 50% of the recurring revenues from Ukraine’s resource extraction. This arrangement mirrors the colonial-era practices in Malaysia, where profits from the extraction of resources were sent back to Britain, often at the expense of local development. In Malaysia’s case, profits from rubber and tin were channeled to British corporations and the British Crown, leaving the local economy underdeveloped. Similarly, the US agreement would place the Ukrainian economy in a subordinate position, with the US receiving a significant share of Ukraine’s revenues, regardless of the country’s pressing domestic needs.

3. Right of First Refusal: Economic Leverage Over Sovereignty

The “Right of First Refusal” provision in the proposed agreement, which would allow the US to control future licenses for Ukraine’s resources, further reflects the power dynamics of colonialism. During British rule in Malaysia, foreign powers had control over critical sectors, dictating the terms of resource extraction and trade. This left the local population with little agency in their own economic development. By granting the US preferential access to Ukraine’s minerals and resources, this clause would limit Ukraine’s ability to independently control its economic future, much as Malaysia’s colonial economy was shaped by foreign interests.

4. Exclusive Control and Legal Governance: A New Form of Subjugation

The proposed terms would also grant the US exclusive rights to set the conditions for all future resource extraction projects in Ukraine, akin to the way the British established exclusive control over economic sectors in Malaysia. During colonial times, the British exercised complete authority over trade, setting up systems that prioritised British interests. Similarly, the US would be able to dictate the terms of Ukraine’s resource economy, further eroding the country’s sovereignty. The clause stating that the agreement would be governed by New York law only adds another layer of control, as it places Ukraine’s economic activities under a foreign legal framework, removing it from its own governance.

5. A Burden on Economic Recovery

Much like the British colonial system in Malaysia, which drained local wealth and left the local population impoverished, the proposed agreement would place a heavy economic burden on Ukraine. In Malaysia, the British imposed taxes and levies on local communities while reaping the profits of natural resources. The terms proposed in the US-Ukraine deal would force Ukraine to prioritise payments to the US over its own economic recovery, stifling its growth potential. This would leave Ukraine in a state of dependency, unable to fully recover from the devastation caused by the war with Russia, much as Malaysia was left struggling to regain its economic independence after the British left.

6. A Modern-Day Versailles Treaty

If enacted, this deal would resemble a modern-day version of the Versailles Treaty, which imposed crippling reparations on Germany after World War I. The terms of the proposed agreement are far more onerous than any reparations imposed on Germany, and they would push Ukraine into a position of economic subjugation. The financial demands placed on Ukraine are so severe that they would make the country dependent on the US for its survival, much like how Malaysia was economically dependent on Britain during the colonial era. In both cases, the local population bears the brunt of foreign economic demands, further entrenching their dependence and hindering their progress.

7. Sovereignty at Risk

Ultimately, the terms of this agreement represent a grave threat to Ukraine’s sovereignty, much as British colonialism represented a loss of control for Malaysia. In both cases, foreign powers sought to control the wealth and resources of the local population, leaving them with limited autonomy. The proposed US-Ukraine deal would transform Ukraine from an independent nation into a subjugated state, economically dependent on the US. This mirrors the exploitation that Malaysia endured under British rule, where local resources were used for the benefit of a foreign power.

A Warning from History

The US-Ukraine agreement serves as a reminder of how economic power can be used to exert control over a nation. Just as the British extracted wealth from Malaysia and maintained control over key sectors of the economy, the proposed deal would leave Ukraine in a position where its economic future is dictated by foreign interests. This new form of economic colonisation is not only detrimental to Ukraine but also serves as a warning for other nations about the dangers of over-reliance on powerful foreign allies. Just as Malaysia struggled to regain control of its resources after British colonial rule, Ukraine must be wary of falling into the same trap of economic subjugation. The world must learn from history, lest we repeat it.