In spite Sabran's initial optimism, it is rather clear what a formidable obstacle the two parties were faced with, which was also a common obstacle for the nation. Being a multicultural society, it is likely that Singaporeans communicate in different languages, often according to their ethnicity. How could this gap be bridged? It is widely assumed that a common language is necessary to build a single society, as in the ease of most European nations. Mahathir Mohammad, Malaysia's former Prime Minister, has pointed out in his book, The Malay Dilemma, that nations have two options with regard to their language policies, either to adopt the US-Australian model of putting a single language at the centre, or adopt the Swiss model which has no national language but four official languages. So which model would Singapore adopt, and if the nation chose the first model which language would be elevated to national langue? Fernando does not provide clear answers to these questions, although he seems to suggest that utmost caution and prudence would be necessary in settling this issue. At one point, Sabran suggests that it is incumbent on everyone to learn Malay as it is the ”original” language of the land. But Peter shows unease with that. He complains that he and his kind have been forced to give up their language over and over again. Each time the Master changed, they were required to switch over to a different tongue: the Portuguese, the Dutch, the English, and the Japanese. Now he will have to unlearn English if Malay was introduced as the national language. ”Now it seems I must unlearn it [English] once more and learn Malay,” he says, disconsolate, and asks his friend in a rather angry tone, ”How many times? Can you tell me that? The process is simply repeating itself, why can't it stop? ” (143). Peter has every reason to feel so disappointed as language is his identity; to deprive him of his tongue would be an act of atrocity. it would be like ”taking out parts [from his body] and putting in new parts” (142). Peter here does not speak for himself alone or for the Eurasian community, but for all the Singapore diasporic communities. Singapore, in order to forge a collective national identity, would have to adopt a language policy that does not marginalise any of the communities; any hierarchy or centre/margin dichotomy would be counterproductive to the cause of national unity. It so happens that Singapore has recognised this challenge in the post-independence period and adopted a language policy in the Swiss model, having four official languages for the country, representing all its major ethnic groups Malay, went well beyond the period of colonial intervention. Fernando concludes that the best way for Singapore to chart its new destiny would be to dispel the race discourse, dismantle gender hierarchy and adopt a language policy that would unify its diverse people, without marginalising any of the groups wilfully.